A Thesis Entitled Phytoremediation Potential at an Inactive Landfill In

A Thesis

Entitled

Phytoremediation potential at an inactive

landfill in northwest Ohio

Kristopher D. Barnswell

Submitted as partial fulfillment of the requirements for

the Master of Science degree in Biology

______Advisor: Daryl F. Dwyer

______Graduate School

The University of Toledo

December 2005

A Thesis

Entitled

Phytoremediation potential at an inactive

landfill in northwest Ohio

Kristopher D. Barnswell

Submitted as partial fulfillment of the requirements for

the Master of Science degree in Biology

______Jiquan Chen Elliot J. Tramer

______Alison L. Spongberg College of Arts and Sciences

______Donald J. Stierman

The University of Toledo

December 2005

This document is copyrighted material. Under copyright law, no parts of this document may be reproduced without the expressed permission of the author.

An Abstract for

Phytoremediation potential at an inactive

landfill in northwest Ohio

Kristopher D. Barnswell

Submitted as partial fulfillment of the requirements for

the Master of Science degree in Biology

The University of Toledo

December 2005

The King Road Landfill (KRL) received municipal solid waste from 1954

through 1976 that was covered with sandy soil. Concern exists that water may

infiltrate through the sandy soil and into the waste thereby producing leachate.

Evapotranspiration (ET) covers are a new approach to prevent infiltration of

precipitation into landfills. They are less expensive than conventional caps and

may perform comparably. The plants chosen to prevent leachate formation can

also be used to restore landfills to native habitat. In this study, 191 vascular plant

species were identified within 56 plots (each 167 m2) at the KRL and questioned for their appropriateness in creating an ET cover and restoring native habitat.

Among these, 117 species were deemed inappropriate (i.e., either not native to

Ohio, have annual/biennial growth, prefer wetland habitat, and/or have vine root

systems). Of the remaining 74 native plants, 18 were either widely distributed,

woody species with a high density (> 45 per hectare), or understory species with

significant ground coverage. These species were considered established at the

KRL and appropriate for further testing of their transpiration performance as a

component in an ET cover.

Another goal was to determine if the primarily wooded KRL is suitable as a

nature preserve for the Oak Openings Region (OOR). For this purpose, we

conducted a second survey in four woodland plant communities representative of

the region (8 plots per community): floodplain, sand barren, oak savanna, and

deciduous woodland located in the Oak Openings Metropark (OOMP). Within

the two surveys, 11 threatened and endangered plant species were observed,

such as Lupinus perennis and Eupatorium album.

The plant community of the KRL was in early stages of development and demonstrated little resemblance to the four OOMP woodland communities. The

KRL contained young plants (70% of the woody species had diameters at breast height (dbh) between 2.5 and 10 cm) that have fast growth rates and short lifespans (e.g., Populus deltoides, Robinia pseudoacacia, and Ulmus pumila), whereas plants at the OOMP were comparatively mature (43% of woody species had dbh measurements > 10 cm), having slow growth rates and long lifespans

(e.g., Hamamelis virginiana and Quercus spp.).

The Jaccard index was used to measure the similarity in species

composition between the KRL and the OOMP. The highest value was only 0.32,

indicating the plant communities at the two sites had little similarity, and suggests

they may be at different stages of development. Comparative values for species

richness, Shannon’s index, Simpson’s index, and evenness at the KRL and the

OOMP were, respectively; 24.15 + 0.76 vs. 14.84 + 0.81; 2.51 + 0.06 vs. 2.01 +

0.09; 0.87 + 0.01 vs. 0.76 + 0.03; and 0.83 + 0.01 vs. 0.79 + 0.03, demonstrating greater diversity at the KRL, which further signifies its early successional stage compared to the OOMP.

In summary, the KRL is in early stages of succession and is developing into a woodland plant community. Seeding the landfill with native plant species may be practical to guide its successional pathway towards a plant community that is appropriate for an ET cover and habitat restoration. The 11 threatened and endangered species ideally would be included in the restoration process and advocate the idea of the KRL being used as a nature preserve for plants that otherwise may be lost from this region.

Acknowledgements

I thank my advisor Dr. Daryl F. Dwyer for giving me the opportunity of this great experience. Your guidance and patience were among the few things that allowed me to reach my goals. I have the utmost respect for you, and your friendship will forever be cherished. The forests out west probably would have given me a beating if it were not for you.

I also express gratitude to my committee members: Dr. Jiquan Chen, Dr.

Alison Spongberg, Dr. Don Stierman, and Dr. Elliot Tramer; to the people of the

Environmental Remediation and Restoration Lab (ERRL): Colin, Issmat, Joe,

Jordan, Josh, Pam, and Rock for assistance and criticism in this study; Traci

Walker for field work assistance; the Lake Erie Center, especially Jeff and Pat for their additional efforts and lunchtime Jeopardy games.

I appreciate the northwest Ohio EPA Division, Lucas County authorities, and the Metroparks of the Toledo Area for access to the field sites; John Jaeger and Tim Walters for assistance in the identification of plants; Tom Hays and Mike

Momenee for information of the landfill’s history.

Finally, I thank my family and friends. My parents have been extremely generous and encouraging throughout this project. My wonderful fiancée

Crystal, you have been the most supportive individual during this long endeavor, and for that, I love you so much more.

vii

Table of Contents

Abstract iv

Acknowledgements vii

Table of Contents viii

List of Figures ix

List of Tables x

Chapter One - Introduction 1

Chapter Two - Materials and Methods 4

Chapter Three - Results 18

Chapter Four – Discussion 42

References 54

Appendix – Catalog of vascular flora identified at the King Road 62 Landfill and the selected plant communities of the Oak Openings Metropark

viii

List of Figures

Figure 1. Areas of operation at the King Road Landfill. 6

Figure 2. Aerial photograph of the King Road Landfill taken in 1957. 7

Figure 3. Aerial photograph of the King Road Landfill taken in 1963. 8

Figure 4. Aerial photograph of the King Road Landfill taken in 1972. 9

Figure 5. Aerial photograph of the King Road Landfill taken in 2001. 10

Figure 6. Aerial photograph of the Oak Openings Metropark. 12

Figure 7. Vegetation survey design. 14

Figure 8. Total number of plant species identified by plot. 36

Figure 9. Shannon’s Index measuring species diversity by plot. 37

Figure 10. Simpson’s Index measuring species diversity by plot. 38

Figure 11. Species evenness by plot. 39

List of Tables

Table 1. Densities of woody plant species. 24

Table 2. Mean percent ground coverage of understory species. 26

Table 3. Jaccard index values. 34

Table 4. Threatened and endangered plant species of Ohio. 41

Table 5. Diameter at breast height distributions for woody plant species. 50

Table 6. Diameter at breast height for woody plant species. 50

Chapter One

Introduction

Landfills without constructed barriers that prevent water from percolating through the contained wastes may generate leachate that contaminates adjacent groundwater (Cozzarelii et al., 2000; Yoon et al., 2003). Conventional caps

(USEPA, 1993) and evapotranspiration (ET) covers (Hauser et al., 2001) can be placed atop the waste to limit water infiltration. Whereas conventional caps remove precipitation as runoff, ET covers store precipitation in the rhizosphere where it is later transpired to the atmosphere. When ET covers function correctly, the rates of transpiration substantially reduce the infiltration of water into the landfill (Rock, 2003; Licht et al., 2004).

ET covers are often less expensive than conventional caps (Dwyer, 1998) and offer additional benefits such as accelerated waste stabilization, reduction in greenhouse gas production, habitat enhancement, and improved aesthetics

(Licht et al., 2001). The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) initiated the Alternative Cover Assessment Program (ACAP) in 1998 to compare the performances of ET covers and conventional caps (Albright et al., 2003). As

described by ACAP, these covers consist of a thick soil layer, with dense vegetation that includes annual and perennial grasses, forbs, shrubs, and hybrid poplars (Bolen et al., 2001; Roesler et al., 2002; Rock, 2003). ET covers were noted to function comparably, except in relatively humid environments (> 20 cm precipitation/year). A general conclusion from the program suggests that ET covers require well-designed, site-specific features (Albright, et al., 2004), which should include the judicious selection of plants that are adapted to function within a given environment and climate. With proper vegetation selection, leachate formation could be reduced to the minimum, acceptable levels. Although, the comparative advantages of an ET cover are difficult to ignore, their application is infrequent in humid regions due to limited cases in which their performance was comparable to conventional caps (Bolen et al., 2001; Albright and Benson, 2002;

Benson et al., 2002; Albright et al., 2004).

The current study is part of an assessment of the plant cover on the inactive King Road Landfill (KRL) in northwest Ohio. While active, the KRL was covered with sandy soil on which diverse vegetation has emerged since operations ceased in 1976. Removal of the existing plant cover and the installation of a conventional cap have been suggested to limit water infiltration to the waste. The goal of this study was to analyze the existing vegetation of the landfill for native-perennial plant species appropriate for an ET cover. Our selection criteria were based on the establishment of the plant species at the

KRL: 1) widely dispersed; 2) woody species with a high density (> 45 individuals

per hectare); or 3) understory species with significant ground coverage.

Additional characteristics useful in an ET cover, but not analyzed in this study

include: rapid growth rates, adaptations to a variety of soil conditions, extensive

root systems, and rapid rates of transpiration (Hauser et al., 2001; Rock, 2003;

Hauser and Gimon, 2004). Future work will involve testing selected plant species for their ability to function in an ET cover.

The KRL is located in the rapidly urbanizing Oak Openings Region (OOR), a unique and vanishing ecosystem that is listed as “One of America’s last great places” by the Nature Conservancy. To assess whether the KRL acts as a refuge for plants that are indigenous to the region, the vegetation survey at the landfill was compared to concurrent surveys for four woodland plant communities that are typical of the OOR.

Chapter Two

Materials and Methods

SITE DESCRIPTION

FIELD SITES

The King Road Landfill (KRL) (41º 40’47” N, 83º 43’22” W) and the Oak

Openings Metropark (OOMP) (41º 32’52” N, 83º 50’06” W) are located in the

OOR. The OOR is a 130 mi2 strip of land in northwest Ohio and southeast

Michigan, originally delineated by Moseley (1928) that was formed by the retreat

of glaciers that left undulating prairies with wet depressions and poorly drained

flats (Sears, 1926). Wind-blown sand deposits from the former glacial Lake

Warren formed sand dunes that have 15 to 30 ft of relief. These were the few

perennial dry areas before the region, known historically as the Black Swamp,

was drained and transformed into agricultural fields in the 19th century (Gordon,

1969). Historically, oak and hickory were the common vegetation on the sand

ridges; elm and ash associations made up large areas of swamp forest (Gordon,

1969). Today only 6,000 acres of the 84,000-acre region remain as high quality

green-space (Green Ribbon Initiative, 2004).

KING ROAD LANDFILL

The KRL contains 104 acres of land in Sylvania Township, Lucas County,

Ohio. Municipal solid waste was deposited onto 82 acres of the landfill in five

different waste disposal parcels that were used in a chronological sequence, starting in 1954 and ending in 1976 (Figure 1). By looking at the aerial photographs of the landfill (Figures 2 - 4), it appeared that the operations began in the east (Figure 2, note denuded areas), and continued westward (Figures 3 &

4). The solid wastes were covered with sandy soil obtained from a 20-acre borrow pit, a source of variation in different roots and seed bank, located in the northwest section of the facility (M. Momenee personal communication, 2004).

Dense vegetation has become established on the sandy soil cover and was first apparent in the east where the earliest waste disposal parcels were used (Figure

4). Today, a developing forest community covers the majority of the landfill

(Figure 5).

Figure 1. Areas of operation at the King Road Landfill

Five different parcels of land (approximate areas and dates of operation) were

used for solid waste disposal. Stars denote the sites of the vegetation survey;

two sites are in each of the five land parcels and the control sites: the SE corner

of the landfill, and the adjacent floodplain of Ten-Mile Creek. (Constructed by

The Mannik & Smith Group, Inc.)

Figure 2. Aerial photograph of the King Road Landfill taken in 1957.

Notice the bare region of the landfill in the northeast. This is where operations began in 1954, clearing out most the natural vegetation. (Courtesy of The

Mannik & Smith Group, Inc.)

0 m 200 m

Figure 3. Aerial photograph of the King Road Landfill taken in 1963.

Notice the bare region in Figure 2 has expanded west and south. Figure 1 also illustrates the sequence of areas of operated. (Courtesy of The Mannik

& Smith Group, Inc.)

0 m 200 m

Figure 4. Aerial photograph of the King Road Landfill taken in 1972.

Operations are on the western side of the landfill. Notice that vegetation has begun to grow on the eastern side. (Courtesy of The Mannik & Smith Group,

Inc.)

0 m 200 m

Figure 5. Aerial photograph of the King Road Landfill taken in 2001.

The landfill is developing into a forest community, as noted by the dense woody vegetation (represented by the dark areas) covering most of the landfill. Grassy areas are apparent only atop the mound (middle of photograph shown by the light area) and in western patches, and are the result of recent human activity.

(Courtesy of The Mannik & Smith Group, Inc.)

0 m 200 m

OAK OPENINGS METROPARK

The OOMP located in southwest Lucas County, Ohio, was established in

1938 and it contains nearly 3,700 acres of the remaining 6,000 acres of natural habitat in the OOR (Metroparks Guide, 2005). The OOMP contains six natural plant communities that are representative of the region; these are: floodplain, sand barren, oak savanna, deciduous woodland, dry grass prairie, and wet grass prairie (J. Jaeger personal communication, 2005).

Figure 6. Aerial photograph of the Oak Openings Metropark.

Locations of the four woodland plant communities (floodplain, sand barren, oak savanna, and deciduous woodland) surveyed in the study. (Constructed by Pam

Struffolino using Arcview GIS, version 3.3)

METHODS

VEGETATION SURVEY

Plant surveys were made during the summer of 2004 using a modification

of the Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA) method developed by the U.S. Forest

Service (USDA Forest Service, 2000). In contrast to the original method, the entire area of each plot was used for the survey (Figure 7). Locations for survey plots were selected randomly, surface roads at the KRL and walking/hiking trails at the OOMP were avoided. At the KRL, two sites were surveyed in each of the five parcels of the landfill, in the non-utilized SE corner of the landfill and in the adjacent Ten-Mile Creek floodplain (Figure 1). Because the latter two sites did not receive waste, they were used as comparative controls to represent the landfill’s undisturbed surroundings. At the OOMP, two sites were surveyed in each of the four woodland plant communities: floodplain, sand barren, oak savanna, and deciduous woodland (Figure 6). In each site, four circular plots

(Figure 7) with a radius of 7.3 m (area = 167 m2) were laid out and marked with

flags. Site coordinates were recorded using the Global Positioning System

(GPS). In total, 22 sites and 88 plots were surveyed: 56 at the KRL and 32 at the

OOMP.

Figure 7. Vegetation survey design.

Distance from the center of the outer plots to the center of the middle plot = 36.6 m; plot radii = 7.3 m; area = 167 m2. In contrast to the original method, designed

by the U.S. Forest Service for incorporation into the FIA program that estimates

percent ground coverage of plant species in three 1 m2 quadrats along azimuths

of 15º, 135º, and 270º, ground coverage of plants was estimated within the entire

area of each plot.

All vascular plants were inventoried in each plot and the data analyzed to discern species composition, structure, and diversity. Nomenclature followed

Cooperrider et al., (2001); plant characteristics were obtained from the U.S.

Department of Agriculture’s Plant Database (USDA, 2004) and their habitat preference from Voss (1972, 1985, and 1996). The inventoried plants were placed into one of two groups:

(1) Woody species with a diameter at breast height (dbh) > 2.5 cm.

These species were counted as individuals; mean densities were calculated for each parcel of the KRL and the four OOMP woodland communities. These means were extrapolated to give the density of woody species per hectare (Table

1).

(2) Understory species (graminoids, forbs, and woody species with dbh < 2.5 cm). These species often cannot be distinguished as individuals

(Whittaker, 1972), therefore, the percent ground coverage of each species within a plot was determined. Due to the difficulty in estimating exact coverage values, the scale crafted by Daubenmire (1959) was used, in which coverage estimates are placed within one of six ranges (0 - 5%, 5 - 25%, 25 - 50%, 50 - 75%, 75 -

95%, 95 - 100%). Ground coverage for each plant species was reported as the midpoint value (i.e., 2.5%, 15%, 37.5%, 62.5%, 85%, and 97.5%) (Table 2) and used in calculating the plant species diversity for each surveyed plot.

DATA ANALYSIS

Similarities in the composition of plant species between the KRL waste

disposal parcels, KRL control sites, and the OOMP woodland communities were

determined using the Jaccard index (Real and Vargas, 1996):

Jc = C / (A + B – C’)

where A is the number of plant species present in site a, B is the number of plant

species present in site b, and C is the number of plant species present in both

site a and b. The Jaccard index enables direct comparison of the species

composition currently inhabiting two different locations for determining the

relationship between the sites.

Comparisons of vegetation composition and structure can be

accomplished easily by visual observation; however, diversity indices provide a

numerical value that allows for a more accurate, less-biased comparison. The

diversity indices used in this study were: (1) Species richness (Whittaker, 1972) -

determined as the total number of plant species identified in each plot (167 m2);

(2 and 3) Shannon’s index (Shannon and Weaver, 1963):

H’ = -∑ pi ln pi

where pi represents the proportion of the total ground coverage percentage; and

Simpson’s index (Simpson, 1949):

2 C = ∑ pi

where pi represents the proportion of the total ground coverage percentage, its

complement Dc = 1 - C was used to obtain an increasing value as diversity increases – both indices measure the diversity of the understory species in each plot; and (4) species evenness (equitability) (Pielou, 1966):

J’ = H’ / ln S where S is the total number of plant species in the plot – measuring the relative proportions of understory species in each plot.

Species diversity values for the KRL and the OOMP were compared using

SAS (Statistical Analysis System, version 9, SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC).

Diversity indices that had calculated values with normal distribution were compared with a t-test, and diversity indices that had calculated values with non- normal distribution were compared with the Wilcoxon sum rank test. Regression analyses were used to test for relationships between the species diversity and the age of the survey plots located within the KRL waste disposal parcels that were operated in a chronological sequence.

Chapter Three

Results

A total of 247 plant species were identified in this study: 191 were located at the King Road Landfill (KRL) and 124 were located at the Oak Openings

Metropark (OOMP); 68 species were present at both the KRL and the OOMP.

There were 40 woody species (Table 1) and 239 understory species (includes woody species with dbh < 2.5 cm). Understory species common throughout the landfill waste parcels (present in at least three) and those believed to originally

be established before the landfill began operation (located in the control sites)

are presented in Table 2. A list of all the plant species identified in this study is

given in Appendix A.

VEGETATION AT THE KRL WASTE DISPOSAL PARCELS

The plant community of the KRL appears to be in early stages of

succession. The dominant plant species are early colonizers with fast growth

rates and short lifespans, however, the landfill shows evidence of progressing

toward a mature woodland community. The oldest parcel (operated from 1954

to 1957) contains woody plant species associated with later stages of community

development (e.g., Hamamelis virginiana and Quercus velutina) (column E in

Table 1), whereas the more recently operated parcels contain woody species

associated with early stages of community development (e.g., Populus deltoides,

Robinia pseudoacacia, and Ulmus pumila). In fact, high densities of these woody species were observed in the more recently operated parcels, while smaller densities were observed in the oldest parcels (Table 1). For example, U. pumila had the highest densities, ranging from 23 individuals per hectare in the oldest parcel (column E in Table 1) to 981 individuals per hectare in the more recently disturbed parcel (column A in Table 1). R. pseudoacacia had the second highest densities per hectare, ranging from 67 to 607 individuals per hectare; P. deltoides had densities ranging from 45 to 225 individuals per hectare (Table 1).

The understory plant species are commonly found in many habitat types, they include: shrub and vine species - Lonicera tatarica (tartarian honeysuckle),

Parthenocissus quinquefolia (virginia creeper), Rubus occidentalis (black raspberry), Toxicodendron radicans (poison ivy), and Vitis aestivalis (summer

grape); herbaceous species - Alliaria petiolata (garlic mustard), Barbarea vulgaris

(yellow rocket), Melilotus alba (white sweet-clover), and Nepeta cataria (catnip);

graminoid species - Bromus japonicus (japanese brome), Elymus repens

(quackgrass), Elymus virginicus (virginia wild rye), and Poa compressa (canada bluegrass) (Table 2). Each of the five parcels contains indigenous and invasive plants with relatively high species diversity values. Thus, it appeared that the

plant communities of the landfill indeed were in early stages of succession.

VEGETATION AT THE KRL CONTROL SITES

SOUTHEAST CORNER AT THE KRL

The southeast corner of the KRL contains plant species that are

associated with early and late stages of community development and commonly

found in many different habitat types. The dominant early successional woody plant species included Acer negundo, (box elder), Morus alba (white mulberry),

Prunus serotina (black cherry), R. pseudoacacia, and U.pumila; dominant late

successional species are H. virginiana and Q. velutina (Table 1).

The dominant understory plant species include: shrub and vine species -

Lonicera tatarica, Parthenocissus quinquefolia, Toxicodendron radicans, and

Vitis aestivalis; herbaceous species – Alliaria petiolata, Erigeron annuus (daisy

fleabane), and Melilotus alba; one graminoid species – Carex pensylvanica

(pennsylvania sedge) (Table 2).

TEN-MILE CREEK FLOODPLAIN

The Ten-Mile Creek floodplain contains plant species that are associated

with early and late stages of community development and commonly inhabit wet

habitats. The dominant woody species include Acer negundo, Acer saccharinum

(silver maple), Aesculus glabra (ohio buckeye), and Ulmus americana (american

elm) (Table 1).

The dominant understory species include: shrub species - Cornus

racemosa (gray dogwood) and Lindera benzoin (spice bush); herbaceous

species - Asarum canadense (wild ginger), Aster lanceolatus var. simplex

(panicled aster), Boehmeria cylindrical (false nettle), Impatiens capensis (spotted

touch-me-not), Laportea canadensis (wood nettle), and Lysimachia nummularia

(moneywort); and graminoid species - Carex intumescens (bladder sedge) and

Leersia virginica (white grass) (Table 2).

VEGETATION AT THE OOMP

The OOMP woodland communities appear to be in the later stages of

community development. The dominant plant species have slow growth rates

and long life spans. Differences in the plant species composition within the four

different woodland communities were apparent by casual observation of each

community and by observing the data in Tables 1 and 2. The hydrology, soil,

and topography are also factors that distinguish one community from another.

The dominant woody species include Acer rubrum (red maple), Quercus spp.

(oak spp.), Sassafras albidum (sassafras), and Prunus serotina (Table 1).

FLOODPLAIN COMMUNITY

The floodplain community contains species associated with wet habitat, such as bog, swamps, and along the shores of streams and rivers. The dominant woody species included: Acer negundo, Cornus racemosa, and Ulmus americana. The dominant understory species include: shrub species - Betula pumila (bog birch), Acer negundo, and Ulmus americana; herbaceous species -

Cryptotaenia canadensis (canadian honewort), Geum canadense L. canadense

(white avens), Pilea pumila (clearweed), and Symplocarupus foetidus; and one graminoid species - Leersia virginica.

OAK SAND BARREN COMMUNITY

The oak sand barren community contains plant species that are commonly found in dry habitats, such as old sand dunes and sandy woods. The dominant woody species include Quercus rubra (red oak) and Sassafras albidum. The dominant understory species include: shrub species - Acer rubrum, Populus deltoides, Quercus spp.; one herbaceous species - Pteridium aquilinum (bracken fern); and graminoid species - Carex spp. and Panicum acuminatum var. lindheimeri (lindheimeri’s panicgrass).

OAK SAVANNA COMMUNITY

The oak savanna community contains plant species that are commonly located in sand plains, forests, and dry woodland habitats. The dominant woody species include Quercus alba (white oak), Quercus velutina, and Sassafras albidum. The dominant understory species include: shrub species - Populus deltoides, Prunus serotina, Quercus spp., Rubus flagellaris (northen dewberry), and Sassafras albidum; one herbaceous species - Dianthus armeria (deptford pink); and graminoid species - Carex spp. and Panicum columbianum.

DECIDUOUS OAK WOODLAND COMMUNITY

The deciduous oak woodland community contains plant species commonly located in upland sandy plains and forests. The dominant woody species include Acer rubrum and Quercus alba. The dominant understory species include: shrub species - Acer rubrum, Lindera benzoin, Quercus spp.,

Sassafras albidum, and Vaccinium vacillans (early lowbush blueberry); and one herbaceous species - Osmunda cinnamomea (cinnamon fern).

Table 1. Densities (individuals per hectare) of woody plant species

Family Species King Road Landfill KRL Control Oak Openings Metropark A B C D E F G H I J K Aceraceae Acer negundo (Box Elder)a 23 75 - 15 8 82 247 64 - - - Acer rubrum (Red Maple) ------30 30 503 Acer saccharinum (Silver Maple) - 15 - - - - 142 8 - - - Anacardiaceae Rhus typhina (Staghorn Sumac)a - 52 - 15 ------Bignoniaceae Catalpa bignonioides - - - - - 8 - - - - - (Common Catalpa) Catalpa speciosa (Northern Catalpa) - - 8 - 8 ------Caesalpiniaceae Gleditsia triacanthos (Honey Locust) 8 - - 8 - 15 - - - - - Cornaceae Cornus amomum (Pale Dogwood) 15 - - - - 15 - - - - - Cornus drummondi - - - - 223 15 - - - - - (Roughleaf Dogwood) Cornus racemosa (Gray Dogwood)a - 90 - - - - 45 82 - - - Cupressaceae Juniperus virginiana - - - - - 8 - - - - - 24 (Eastern Red Cedar) Fabaceae Robinia pseudoacacia 607 359 67 270 300 187 - - - - - (Black Locust) Fagaceae Quercus alba (White Oak) ------37 187 240 Quercus bicolor (Swamp White Oak) ------30 - - - Quercus rubra (Red Oak) ------217 - - Quercus velutina (Black Oak) - - - - 15 30 - 8 - 75 90 Hamamelidaceae Hamamelis virginiana (Witch Hazel) - - - - 8 15 - - - - 97 Hippocastanaceae Aesculus glabra (Ohio Buckeye) ------142 - - - - Juglandaceae Juglans nigra (Black Walnut) - 23 - - - 8 - 30 - - - Lauraceae Lindera benzoin (Spice Bush) ------15 - - - 8 Sassafras albidum (Sassafras) - - - - - 45 - - 82 97 37 Moraceae Morus alba (White Mulberry) 45 - 8 15 - 82 - 15 - - - Oleaceae Fraxinus americana (White Ash) ------60 - - - Fraxinus pennsylvanica var. 23 52 - - 8 - 52 - - - - pennsylvanica (Green Ash)a

Table 1 continued Family Species King Road Landfill KRL Control Oak Openings Metropark A B C D E F G H I J K Fraxinus pennsylvanica var. 60 - - 23 8 30 15 - - - - subintegerrima (Red Ash)a Fraxinus quadrangulata (Blue Ash) - - - - - 8 - - - - - Rhamnaceae Rhamnus cathartica 8 15 - - 8 8 - - - - - (Common Buckthorn) Rosaceae Crataegus spp. (Hawthorn spp.) - 8 - - - - 23 - - - - Prunus avium (Sweet Cherry) - - - - - 8 - - - - - Prunus serotina (Black Cherry)a - 37 8 15 15 82 - - - 52 52 Prunus virginiana (Choke Cherry) 8 - - - - 23 - - 37 - - Prunus sp. (Cherry sp.) - 8 ------Saliaceae Populus deltoides 45 217 105 105 225 52 - - - - - (Eastern Cottonwood)ab Simaroubaceae Salix nigra (Black Willow) ------8 - - -

25 Tiliaceae Ailanthus altissima (Tree of Heaven) - 8 75 - 45 8 - - - - - Ulmaceae Tilia americana ------30 - - - - (American Basswood) Celtis occidentalis (Hackberry) 8 8 - - - - 23 30 - - - Ulmus americana (American Elm) 15 23 - - - - 127 75 - - - Ulmus pumila (Chinese Elm) 981 344 314 23 23 374 - - - - - Ulmus rubra (Slippery Elm)a 45 - - - - 8 - - - - -

Woody species as number of individuals per hectare at the KRL and OOMP. The columns are: KRL waste disposal parcels (A = 1969-1976, B = 1963-1969, C = 1960-1963, D = 1957-1960, E = 1954-1957); KRL control sties (F = SE corner of landfill, G = floodplain adjacent to Ten-mile Creek); OOMP plant communities (H = floodplain, I = sand barren, J = oak savanna, K = deciduous woodland). Common names underlined are species indigenous to the region. Dashes denote species not present. aPlant species at the KRL considered appropriate for an ET cover; bPlant species being studied at ACAP testing sites.

Table 2. Mean percent ground coverage of understory species

Family Species King Road Landfill KRL Control Oak Openings Metropark A B C D E F G H I J K Anacardiaceae Toxicodendron radicans 15 15 2.5 2.5 2.5 37.5 2.5 2.5 - - - (Poison Ivy) Apiaceae Cryptotaenia canadensis ------2.5 15 - - - (Canadian Honewort) Daucus carota (Wild Carrot) 15 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 ------Araceae Arisaema dracontium ------2.5 2.5 - - - (Green Dragon) Arisaema triphyllum ------2.5 - - - 2.5 (Jack-in-the-pulpit) Aristochiaceae Asarum canadense (Wild Ginger) ------15 - - - - Asclepediaceae Asclepias exaltata (Poke Milkweed) - - - - 2.5 2.5 - - - - - Asteraceae Achillea millefolium (Yarrow)ab 2.5 - 2.5 - 2.5 - - - - 2.5 - Ambrosia artemisiifolia 2.5 2.5 15 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 - 2.5 - - 26 (Annual Ragweed) Ambrosia trifida (Great Ragweed) - - - 2.5 - 2.5 - - - - - Aster lanceolatus var. simplex - 2.5 - - - - 15 2.5 - - - (Panicled Aster) Conyza canadensis (Horseweed) 2.5 - 2.5 2.5 - 2.5 - - - - - Erigeron annuus (Daisy Fleabane) 15 2.5 15 2.5 2.5 15 - - - - - Erigeron pulchellus var. pulchellus 2.5 - 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 - - 2.5 2.5 - (Robin’s Plantain)a Eupatorium album 2.5 2.5 15 - 2.5 2.5 - - - - - (White Boneset)a Helianthus divaricatus 2.5 - - - - 2.5 - - - - - (Woodland Sunflower) Solidago canadensis var. canadensis 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 ------(Canada Goldenrod)a Tragopogon dubius (Yellow Salsify) - 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 ------Balsaminaceae Impatiens capensis - - - - 2.5 - 15 2.5 - - - (Spotted Touch-me-not) Boraginaceae Lithospermum officinale 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 - 2.5 - 2.5 - - - (European Gromwell)

Table 2 continued Family Species King Road Landfill KRL Control Oak Openings Metropark A B C D E F G H I J K Brassicaceae Alliaria petiolata (Garlic Mustard) 2.5 15 15 15 2.5 15 15 2.5 - - 2.5 Barbarea vulgaris (Yellow Rocket) 15 15 - - 15 ------Lepidium campestre 2.5 2.5 2.5 - 2.5 ------(Field Pepperweed) Thlaspi arvense (Field Pennycress) - - - - - 2.5 - - - 2.5 - Caprifoliaceae Lonicera maackii 2.5 2.5 ------(Amur Honeysuckle) Lonicera tatarica 15 2.5 2.5 15 2.5 15 2.5 - - - - (Tartarian Honeysuckle) Caryophyllaceae Arenaria serpyllifolia - - - 2.5 2.5 15 - - - - - (Thyme-leaf Sandwort) Dianthus armeria (Deptford Pink) 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 - - - 15 - Silene latifolia (White Campion) - 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 ------Celastraceae Celastrus scandens - - - - 2.5 2.5 - - - - -

27 (American Bittersweet) Clusiaceae Hypericum perforatum - 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 - - - - - (Common St. Johnswort) Cyperaceae Carex intumescens ------2.5 2.5 - - - (Bladder Sedge) Carex pensylvanica 2.5 - - - 2.5 15 - - 2.5 2.5 2.5 (Pennsylvania Sedge) Euphorbiaceae Acalypha virginica var. rhomboidea - - - 2.5 - 15 - - - - - (Three-seeded Mercury) Fabaceae Lupinus perennis (Wild Lupine) - - - - - 2.5 - - 2.5 - - Medicago lupulina (Black Medick) - 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 - - - - - Melilotus alba 2.5 15 15 15 15 15 - - - - - (White Sweet Clover) Melilotus officinalis 2.5 15 2.5 2.5 15 2.5 - - - - - (Yellow Sweet Clover) Geraniaceae Geranium maculatum - 2.5 - 2.5 2.5 2.5 - - - - - (Wild Geranium)a Lamiaceae Leonurus cardiaca (Motherwort) - 2.5 - 2.5 2.5 2.5 - - - - -

Table 2 continued Family Species King Road Landfill KRL Control Oak Openings Metropark A B C D E F G H I J K Monarda fistulosa (Wild Bergamot) - 2.5 - - - 2.5 - - - - - Nepeta cataria (Catnip) - 15 15 2.5 15 2.5 - - - - - Oleaceae Ligustrum vulgare (Common Privet) 2.5 2.5 - - 2.5 ------Onagraceae Circaeae lutetiana var. canadensis - - - 2.5 2.5 2.5 - 2.5 - - - (Enchanter’s Nightshade) Oxalidaceae Oxalis stricta 15 2.5 2.5 2.5 15 2.5 - - - - - (Yellow Wood-sorrel)a Plantaginaceae Plantago lanceolata - 2.5 - 2.5 2.5 ------(English Plantain) Plantago major (Common Plantain) - 2.5 - 2.5 2.5 ------Poaceae Agrostis gigantea (Redtop) 15 - 2.5 2.5 2.5 - - - - 2.5 - Bromus inermis (Smooth Brome) - 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 ------Bromus japonicus 15 - 15 15 - 2.5 2.5 - - - - (Japanese Brome)

28 Bromus latiglumis ------2.5 (Ear-leaved Brome) Bromus pubescens 2.5 - 2.5 - 2.5 ------(Woodland Brome)ab Danthonia spicata (Poverty Grass)a 15 - 2.5 2.5 - - - - 2.5 2.5 - Elymus repens (Quack Grass) - 2.5 2.5 15 15 - 2.5 - - - - Elymus virginicus - - 15 15 - - 2.5 2.5 - - - (Virginia Wild Rye)a Leersia virginica (White Grass) ------2.5 15 - - - Lolium arundinaceum 2.5 - 2.5 2.5 15 ------(Tall Fescue)b Lolium perenne - - 2.5 15 2.5 ------(Perennial Rye Grass)b Panicum acuminatum var. - - - - - 2.5 - - - - - fasiculatum (Old-field Panic Grass) Panicum columbianum 15 2.5 2.5 - - 2.5 - - 2.5 15 - (American Panic Grass)a Phleum pratense (Timothy) 2.5 - - - - 2.5 - - 2.5 - -

Table 2 continued Family Species King Road Landfill KRL Control Oak Openings Metropark A B C D E F G H I J K Poa compressa - - 15 15 2.5 2.5 - - 2.5 2.5 - (Canada Blue Grass)b Poa pratensis - - 2.5 15 15 - - - - 2.5 - (Kentucky Blue Grass)b Setaria glauca - 2.5 2.5 2.5 ------(Yellow Foxtail Grass) Setaria viridis (Green Foxtail Grass) - - 2.5 2.5 - 2.5 - - - - - Polygonaceae Polygonum convolvulus 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 - 2.5 2.5 - - - - (Black Bindweed) Polygonum virginianum (Jumpseed) - 2.5 - - - - - 2.5 - - - Rumex crispus (Curly Dock) 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 - - - - Primulaceae Lysimachia ciliata ------2.5 - - - - (Fringed Loosestrife) Lysimachia nummularia ------37.5 2.5 - - -

29 (Moneywort) Lysimachia quadrifolia ------2.5 - - 2.5 - (Whorled Loosestrife) Ranunculaceae Ranunculus hispidus var.hispidus ------2.5 - - 2.5 - (Hispid Buttercup) Ranunculus hispidus var. nitidus ------2.5 - - - - (Swamp Buttercup) Thalictrum thalictroides - - - - - 2.5 - 2.5 - - - (Rue Anemone) Rhamnaceae Ceanothus americanus - - - - - 2.5 - - - - - (New Jersey Tea) Rosaceae Fragaria vesca - - - - - 2.5 - - - - - (Woodland Strawberry) Geum canadense (White Avens) 2.5 2.5 - - 2.5 2.5 2.5 15 - - - Potentilla recta (Sulphur Cinquefoil) 2.5 2.5 - 2.5 2.5 ------Rubus flagellaris - 2.5 - 2.5 2.5 2.5 - - 2.5 15 2.5 (Northern Dewberry) Rubus occidentalis 2.5 15 2.5 15 15 2.5 - - - - - (Black Raspberry)

Table 2 continued Family Species King Road Landfill KRL Control Oak Openings Metropark A B C D E F G H I J K Rubus pensilvanicus - - - - - 2.5 - - - - - (Pennsylvania Blackberry) Rubiaceae Galium circaezans (Wild Licorice) - - - - - 2.5 - - - 2.5 - Scrophulariaceae Verbascum thapsus 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 - - - 2.5 - (Common Mullein) Solanaceae Solanum carolinense (Horsenettle) 2.5 2.5 - 2.5 ------Urticaceae Boehmeria cylindrical (False Nettle) 2.5 - 2.5 - - - 2.5 - - - - Laportea canadensis (Wood Nettle) ------37.5 37.5 - - - Pilea pumila (Clearweed) ------2.5 15 - - - Violaceae Viola pubescens ------2.5 - - - - (Downy Yellow Violet) Vitaceae Parthenocissus quinquefolia 15 37.5 2.5 15 37.5 37.5 15 15 - - 2.5 (Virginia Creeper) Vitis aestivalis (Summer Grape) 2.5 15 15 15 15 15 2.5 - - 2.5 - 30

The calculated mean percent ground coverage of understory plant species. The list includes KRL species considered appropriate for an ET covera and those in at least three of the five waste disposal parcels or one of the two control sites. Plants from Table 1 are not included. The columns are: KRL waste disposal parcels (A = 1969-1976, B = 1963-1969, C = 1960-1963, D = 1957-1960, E = 1954-1957); KRL control sties (F = SE corner of landfill, G = floodplain adjacent to Ten- mile Creek); OOMP plant communities (H = floodplain, I = sand barren, J = oak savanna, K = deciduous woodland). Common names underlined are species indigenous to the region. Dashes denote species not present. bPlant species being studied at ACAP testing sites. If the species are in OOMP, they are included for comparison.

DATA ANALYSIS

JACCARD INDEX

The Jaccard index assigns a value of 1.0 to two sites having all species in

common and a value of 0 to two sites having no species in common; a value >

0.5 signifies similarity (Abella et al., 2001). Jaccard index values were obtained

in this study by comparing: (1) KRL waste disposal parcels to KRL control sites,

(2) KRL control sites to OOMP plant communities, and (3) KRL waste disposal

parcels to OOMP plant communities (Table 3):

(1) KRL waste disposal parcels and KRL control sites - All of the

Jaccard index values comparing the parcels and the control sites were

insignificant (< 0.5) (Table 3). The highest Jaccard value obtained (0.38) was for

the oldest waste disposal parcel and the SE corner (Table 3). This suggests that

vegetation may be spreading from the SE corner onto the landfill parcels. We

had expected the Jaccard values would be significant for the parcels and the SE

corner control site because of the fairly short distance between the sites, which

may facilitate seed dispersal. The relatively short distance between the parcels and the Ten-Mile Creek floodplain also made us believe their Jaccard values would be moderate. A trend was present; the parcels first operated (older parcels) had greater Jaccard values compared to the more recently operated ones (younger parcels) that had lower values (Table 3). This may have resulted

from the additional time to develop (note the growth of vegetation in the parcels operated from 1954 to 1957 and from 1957 to 1960, Figures 1 & 4). Because the

Jaccard values obtained in this category were not significant (< 0.5), we assumed that there would be little similarity in the species composition between the KRL waste disposal parcels and the mature OOMP woodland communities.

(2) KRL control sites and OOMP plant communities - I considered that the control sites and the OOMP communities are in later stages of succession than the KRL, because neither has recently experienced a devastating disturbance (the OOMP oak savanna community frequently receives prescribed burns to control the spread of understory species and both floodplain communities experience seasonal flooding, however, I still regarded these communities as being in later stages of succession because of the older trees inhabiting them). Additionally, because both the control sites and the woodland communities are located in the OOR, I anticipated they could have similar species compositions. However, the highest Jaccard value (0.32) in this category was lower than the value obtained (0.38) for comparing the waste disposal parcels and the control sites (Table 3). The two floodplain sites demonstrated the highest similarity value (0.32) obtained in this category. This was expected, as both sites are located in similar habitat types, near frequently flooding waterways. However, this value was non-significant, and the little similarity between the two sites may have resulted from different water table depths or soil compositions. Bearing in mind that little similarity was observed

between the control sites and the parcels (sites are relatively close in distance)

we would expect that the similarity between the parcels and the OOMP to be

very low.

(3) KRL waste disposal parcels and OOMP plant communities – Since

the active KRL was covered with sandy soil, we predicted that the greatest similarity would be for comparisons of all the parcels with the OOMP sand barren community. However, this was inaccurate, as the highest Jaccard value (0.15) in this category was for the parcel operated from 1960 to 1963 and the oak savanna plant community (Table 3). All Jaccard index values were non- significant (< 0.5), concluding little similarity in species composition between the

KRL and the OOMP.

Table 3. Jaccard index values

Jaccard index values for comparing the similarity in species composition between

sites.

Parcel/ KRL SE KRL FP OOFP OOSB OOSV OOWD Community

1954–1957 0.3826 0.0789 0.0738 0.0789 0.1345 0.0917

1957–1960 0.3545 0.1078 0.0901 0.0762 0.1161 0.0381

1960–1963 0.3 0.0909 0.0756 0.0909 0.1478 0.0357

1963–1969 0.3274 0.1515 0.1402 0.0459 0.0678 0.0476

1969–1976 0.3065 0.1351 0.1261 0.0957 0.122 0.0609

KRL SE - - 0.115 0.1238 0.1404 0.1068

KRL FP - - 0.3235 0.0123 0.0444 0.0685

Note: Time periods of the KRL waste disposal parcels are represented by the

years they were used: KRL SE = southeast corner of the landfill; KRL FP = floodplain adjacent to Ten-Mile Creek at the landfill; OOFP = floodplain; OOSB = sand barren; OOSV = oak savanna; OOWD = deciduous woodland. Dashes denote that the Jaccard index was not calculated.

DIVERSITY INDICES

The numbers of families, genera, and species present at the KRL (62,

136, and 191, respectively) were higher than at the OOMP (52, 93, and 124,

respectively). This was not surprising because species diversity is expected to

increase in the early stages of succession (Egler, 1954; Margalef, 1963) reaching

a peak at mid-succession (Vankat and Snyder, 1991) and decrease in the late

stages of succession (Horn, 1974). Accordingly, the four diversity indices

generally were higher for the recently disturbed KRL than for the OOMP

woodland communities (Figures 8 – 11). Significantly different values were

attained for: species richness between the KRL (24.15 + 0.76) and the OOMP

(14.84 + 0.81) (t-test, P < 0.05); Shannon index between the KRL (2.51 + 0.06)

and the OOMP (2.01 + 0.09) (Wilcoxon rank sum test, P < 0.05); and Simpson

index between the KRL (0.87 + 0.01) and the OOMP (0.76 + 0.03) (Wilcoxon

rank sum test, P < 0.05). However, no significant difference was obtained for

evenness between the KRL (0.83 + 0.01) and the OOMP (0.79 + 0.03) (Wilcoxon rank sum test, P > 0.05). The higher diversity values at the KRL likely are a result of recent disturbances that allow weedy species to invade, establish, and develop.

Figure 8. Total number of plant species identified by plot.

The species richness (SR) by plot (167 m2) in the KRL waste disposal parcels (1

= 1969-1976; 2 = 1963-1969; 3 = 1960-1963; 4 = 1957-1960; 5 = 1954-1957),

KRL control sites (6 = SE corner of landfill; 7 = floodplain adjacent to Ten-Mile

Creek), and OOMP plant communities (8 = floodplain; 9 = sand barren; 10 = oak

savanna; 11 = deciduous woodland). Values are expressed as Mean (n = 8) +

SE.

Figure 9. Shannon’s Index measuring species diversity by plot.

The calculated Shannon diversity index values by plot (167 m2) in the KRL waste

disposal parcels (1 = 1969-1976; 2 = 1963-1969; 3 = 1960-1963; 4 = 1957-1960;

5 = 1954-1957), KRL control sites (6 = SE corner of landfill; 7 = floodplain adjacent to Ten-Mile Creek), and OOMP plant communities (8 = floodplain; 9 =

sand barren; 10 = oak savanna; 11 = deciduous woodland). Values are

expressed as Mean (n = 8) + SE.

Figure 10. Simpson’s Index measuring species diversity by plot.

The complement of the Simpson diversity index values (1 – D) by plot (167 m2) in the KRL waste disposal parcels (1 = 1969-1976; 2 = 1963-1969; 3 = 1960-1963;

4 = 1957-1960; 5 = 1954-1957), KRL control sites (6 = SE corner of landfill; 7 = floodplain adjacent to Ten-Mile Creek), and OOMP plant communities (8 = floodplain; 9 = sand barren; 10 = oak savanna; 11 = deciduous woodland).

Values are expressed as Mean (n = 8) + SE.

Figure 11. Species evenness by plot.

The calculated evenness by plot (167 m2) in the KRL waste disposal parcels (1 =

1969-1976; 2 = 1963-1969; 3 = 1960-1963; 4 = 1957-1960; 5 = 1954-1957), KRL control sites (6 = SE corner of landfill; 7 = floodplain adjacent to Ten-Mile Creek), and OOMP plant communities (8 = floodplain; 9 = sand barren; 10 = oak savanna; 11 = deciduous woodland). Values are expressed as Mean (n = 8) +

SE.

THREATENED AND ENDANGERED PLANT SPECIES

We identified 11 threatened and endangered plant species in Ohio (Table

4). Five species were identified at the KRL and eight at the OOMP; two species

were identified at both locations. Of the endangered species at the KRL,

Eupatorium album was noted to be a good candidate for an ET cover; Digitaria filiformis (verified by T. Walters) is presumed extirpated in Ohio, but was also identified.

Table 4. Threatened and endangered plant species of Ohio

Plant species identified at the KRL and OOMP.

Species Site Status

Betula pumila (Bog Birch) OOMP T

Carex siccata (Hay Sedge) OOMP E

Comptoina peregrina (Sweet Fern) OOMP T

Digitaria filiformis (Slender Crab Grass) KRL PE

Elymus trachycaulus (Bearded Wheat Grass) KRL T

Eupatorium album (White Thoroughwort)* KRL T

Helianthemum canadense (Rockrose) OOMP PT

Krigia virginica (Virginia Dwarf Dandelion) OOMP T

Lupinus perennis (Wild Lupine) KRL, OOMP PT

Panicum lindheimeri (Lindheimer’s Panic Grass) KRL, OOMP E

Polygala polygama (Racemed Milkwort) OOMP T

Note: * ET cover candidate; E = endangered; T = threatened; PE = presumed

extirpated; PT= potentially threatened. (Status determined by Ohio Biological

Survey).

Chapter Four

Discussion

The King Road Landfill (KRL) is one example of the many landfills in northwest Ohio that ended operation prior to the start of solid waste disposal regulations by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). During the time of its operation (1954 to 1976), five waste disposal parcels were used in a chronological sequence with activity beginning in the eastern side and moving westward (Figure 1) and covered with sandy soil; a vegetation cover has developed sequentially as well (Figure 4). The procedure used to “cap” the KRL did not meet RCRA standards (initiated some months after operations ceased) that were established for municipal solid waste landfill facilities. There is some concern that leachate from the landfill may spread to the surrounding area.

EVAPOTRANSPIRATION COVERS VS. CONVENTIONAL CAPS

The regulatory standards set by RCRA focus on establishing low- maintenance cover systems that minimize the infiltration of precipitation into the underlying waste. Traditionally, this has involved using a layered cap consisting of synthetic materials, clay, sand, topsoil, and vegetation to minimize

percolation rates (USEPA, 1993). This general technique may effectively reduce infiltration, but these caps are expensive to construct.

We believe that an ET cover could be used at the KRL to inhibit the spread of leachate. ET covers are less expensive to construct; however, their application is infrequent due to limited cases in which their performance has been comparable to conventional caps in humid regions (Bolen et al., 2001;

Benson et al., 2002; Albright and Benson, 2002; Albright et al., 2004). The

Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation Program (SITE) first addressed ET covers in 1998 (Bolen et al., 2001) with the introduction of the Alternative Cover

Assessment Program (ACAP). As described by ACAP, ET covers primarily consist of a thick soil layer with dense native vegetation that includes grasses

(annual and perennial), forbs, shrubs, and hybrid poplars (Bolen et al., 2001;

Roesler et al., 2002; Rock, 2003). To analyze the performance of ET covers under different climate conditions, the ACAP has multiple testing sites located in arid, semi-arid, and humid regions of the U.S.

Not surprisingly, research of ET covers in the various climatic regions by the ACAP strongly suggests that vegetation and soil composition be considered in order for them to perform properly (Rock, 2003). The most critical feature is that the plants will govern the performance of the cover by regulating the water balance via transpiration. There are many characteristics of plant species that benefit an ET cover, these include: (1) native to the region and adapted to the

regional climate; (2) long-lived perennials that remain through numerous growing seasons; (3) express rapid growth, thus able to begin performing in a short time period; (4) adapted to a variety of soil conditions, such as those found at contaminated sites; (5) have deep extensive root systems that provide erosion control and water uptake from deep soil layers; and (6) transpire water over a long growing season (Hauser et al., 2001; Hauser and Gimon, 2004).

PLANT SPECIES SUITABLE FOR AN ET COVER

Ideally, for an ET cover at the KRL we would use perennial plant species that are native to Ohio and adapted to the inherent climatic conditions. Our criteria for the selection of beneficial plants species was based on their establishment at the KRL, these included: 1) widely dispersed (located in at least three waste disposal parcels); 2) woody species with a high density (> 45 individuals per hectare); or 3) understory species with significant ground coverage (Tables 1 and 2). There were 18 species that fit our criteria; nine of these species were also common in the OOMP (shown in bold) signifying their widespread occurrence in this region. These 18 species are: Acer negundo,

Achillea millefolium, Bromus pubescens, Cornus racemosa, Danthonia spicata, Elymus virginicus, Erigeron pulchellus var. pulchellus, Eupatorium album, Fraxinus pennsylvanica var. pennsylvanica, Fraxinus pennsylvanica var. subintegerrima, Geranium maculatum, Oxalis stricta, Panicum columbianum,

Populus deltoides, Prunus serotina, Rhus typhina, Solidago canadensis var.

canadensis, and Ulmus rubra (Tables 1 and 2 denoted by a). Besides these 18,

an additional four species (Table 2 b) have been used in ACAP testing sites; however they did not meet our criteria for selection in this region. These were

Lolium arundinaceum, Lolium perenne, Poa compressa, and Poa pratensis

(Table 2 denoted by b). All 22 plant species are candidates for future studies to

ascertain their ability to inhibit leachate formation at the KRL.

PLANT SPECIES UNSUITABLE FOR AN ET COVER

Many plant species present at the KRL were considered inhibitory to

creating a successful ET cover. Reasons for this include: 1) they did not meet

our criteria stated above, or 2) they may inhibit the growth of candidate plant

species by shading. Examples are Bromus japonicus, Lonicera tatarica,

Parthenocissus quinquefolia, Rubus occidentalis, Toxicodendron radicans, and

Vitis aestivalis.

COMPARING KRL TO ACAP TESTING SITES

The ACAP has multiple testing sites located in climatic regions ranging

from arid to humid. The percolation rate is the most critical aspect for

determining if an ET cover meets performance expectations. In comparison to

the KRL, which receives >80 cm precipitation/year (Weatherbase, 2005), ACAP

has testing sites located in two southern Ohio cities (Cincinnati and Logan) that

both receive >90 cm precipitation/year (Albright and Benson, 2002). There are also testing sites located in cities of Georgia, Iowa, and Nebraska; all receiving between 70 and 120 cm precipitation/year (Albright et al., 2004). Percolation rates for the testing sites located in Georgia, Iowa, and Nebraska ranged from 33 to 159 mm/year. However, these rates are unacceptable and much greater than the acceptable rates for ACAP testing sites located in the arid and semi-arid regions of California, Montana, Oregon, and Utah; which had percolation rates

<1.5 mm/year (Albright et al., 2004). These results indicate that ET covers in humid regions do not perform as well as ET covers in arid or semi-arid regions

(Benson et al., 2002; Albright et al., 2004). However, the vegetation at the humid sites did not have time to develop an extensive root system. Allowing for longer study times may overcome this apparent problem (Albright et al., 2004).

Unfortunately, the testing sites located in Ohio are atypical in that they use leachate collection systems instead of lysimeters (Benson et al., 1999); thus, data concerning the covers’ performance are unavailable.

In future studies, we plan to test indigenous plant species identified here, using different soil amendments to create a successful landfill cover that limits leachate formation while restoring natural habitat. Rather than the typical ACAP pan lysimeters (10 x 20 m), we will be using initially cylindrical lysimeters (5 ft. diameter, 5 ft. depth) to test plants with respect to evapotranspiration rates.

Selected plants will be further studied at the KRL in ET covers that will be constructed by Lucas County authorities.

SPECIES COMPOSITION OF THE KRL AND THE OOMP

The KRL currently contains a significant amount of “green space” in a rapidly urbanizing area. The second goal of this study was to analyze whether the vegetation is indigenous and representative of the region. Because the initial cover of the KRL primarily consisted of sandy soil, we hypothesized that the plant community may resemble the OOMP sand barren plant community. However, the results indicated little similarity between the KRL and any of the four OOMP woodland communities. Jaccard index values were consistently insignificant (<

0.5). Insignificant values also existed between the control areas surrounding the

KRL and the OOMP plant communities (Table 3). The dissimilarity in species composition may have resulted from one of the following: (1) the landfill is still in early stages of succession (Tables 5 and 6), with only thirty to fifty years of natural development; (2) the landfill soil has been disturbed and/or may contain unknown contaminants; or (3) the topography of the KRL is mound-shaped with sloping slides, whereas the OOR is relatively flat.

SUCCESSION AT THE KRL

Plant species identified in the waste disposal parcels were compared to the species identified in the control sites (locations thought to contain species established before the landfill started operation) surrounding the landfill. For this purpose, we attempted to determine whether: (1) the plant species established in

the control sites have dispersed onto the landfill parcels; and (2) there are

species on the parcels that may not have originally been established in the area.

We hypothesized there would be a greater similarity with the waste

disposal parcels and the SE corner control site than with the floodplain adjacent to the landfill (Table 3), because of the comparable soil and habitat types. The

SE corner is located within the landfill perimeter and may contain the same

sandy soil used for covering the waste; the floodplain is located near Ten-Mile

Creek, which frequently floods, and thus contains hydric soil. As expected, there

were 17 woody species (e.g., Ailanthus altissima, Hamamelis virginiana,

Rhamnus cathartica, Robinia pseudoacacia, and Quercus velutina) located in the

landfill parcels and in the SE corner, while there were only 7 species (e.g., Acer

negundo, Cornus racemosa, Celtis occidentalis, and Ulmus americana) located

in the parcels and the floodplain (Table 1). The plants located in the control sites

that have not dispersed onto the parcels were Sassafras albidum, Catalpa

bignonioides, Prunus avium in the SE, Aesculus glabra, Lindera benzoin, and

Tilia americana in the floodplain. Species that are currently present in the

parcels but not in the control sites were Rhus typhina and Catalpa speciosa.

The accepted trend for species diversity during succession is an increase

in early stages (Egler,1954; Margalef, 1963), a peak in mid-stages (Tilman, 1985;

Vankat and Snyder, 1991; Howard and Lee, 2003), and a decrease in the later

stages (Horn, 1974). By comparing the KRL to the OOMP it became apparent

that the diversity at the landfill was significantly greater than at the OOMP in all

aspects except for evenness (Figures 8 – 11). The plants found on the KRL

waste disposal parcels contain many species associated with early stages in

community development, which are commonly invasive, early colonizers, have

fast growth rates, and short life spans (Odum, 1969). The majority of the plant

species identified at the OOMP were associated with later stages of community

development, that typically are late colonizers with slow growth rates and long life spans (Odum, 1969).

To determine if any trends were evident in the successional pathway at the KRL, we analyzed the waste disposal parcels in a chronological sequence

with respect to the mean diversity and dbh recordings of the plants using

regression analyses. There were no clear relationships between plant diversity

and the age of the landfill parcel, as the diversity values ranged widely between

parcels (Figures 8 – 11), resulting in extremely small regression coefficients (R2

<< 0.05). These results contrast with the relationships observed in past studies

(Bazzaz, 1975; Inouye et al., 1987), in which increasing trends of species

richness and diversity over time were observed. However, there was a positive

relationship between dbh and age (Table 6). The presence of climax species in

the older parcels and control sites (Table 1), and the increasing average dbh

(Table 6) suggests that succession is occurring at the KRL (Odum, 1969).

Table 5. Diameter at breast height distributions for woody plant species.

The number of individuals measured for diameter at breast height in the KRL

waste disposal parcels (40 plots) and the OOMP plant communities (32 plots).

Percentage and number of recordings for each dbh range are displayed.

DBH (cm) ranges Site 2.5 – 10 10 – 17.5 – 25 – 32.5 – 40 – > 47.5 Totals 17.5 25 32.5 40 47.5 KRL % 71.0 18.0 7.0 3.0 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 100 subtotal 486 123 50 19 7 1 0 686 OOMP % 47.0 20.0 16.0 10.0 4.0 2.0 1.0 100 subtotal 145 61 47 32 12 5 4 306

Table 6. Diameter at breast height (cm) for woody plant species.

Mean diameter at breast height (dbh) recordings at the KRL waste disposal

parcels (A = 1969-1976; B = 1963-1969; C = 1960-1963; D = 1957-1960; E =

1954-1957), KRL control sites (F = SE corner of landfill; G = floodplain adjacent

to Ten-mile Creek), and the OOMP plant communities (H = floodplain; I = sand

barren; J = oak savanna; K = deciduous woodland). N = number of individuals

recorded. Mean + SE

Sites King Road Landfill KRL Control Oak Openings Metropark Parcel / A B C D E F G H I J K Community 8.17 8.81 9.44 9.14 9.23 10.86 15.43 17.37 8.92 18.04 13.23 DBH + + + + + + + + + + + 0.02 0.03 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.11 0.27 0.12 0.18 0.08 N 251 181 79 85 95 149 112 54 54 59 139

Threatened, endangered, potentially threatened, and presumed extirpated

plant species were identified at the landfill (Table 4). The presence of these

indicates that the KRL could serve as a repository for plants that may otherwise

be lost from the flora of this region. Lupinus perennis (wild lupine) exemplifies an important species that serves, as the only food source for larvae of the locally endangered Karner blue butterfly (Lycaeides melissa samuelis) (Grundel et al.,

1998). For this reason, we are recommending that the landfill serve as a nature

preserve for indigenous plants of the OOR, and that the creation of an ET cover

incorporates stages to provide habitat for endangered plant species.

SUMMARY

(1) The KRL is developing into a highly diverse woodland community atop the

sandy soil cover, including a mixture of indigenous and invasive graminoids,

forbs, shrubs, and trees.

(2) Of the 191 plant species identified at the KRL, 18 species were noted as

potential candidates for an ET cover. These were native perennial species that were either widely distributed, woody species with a high density (> 45

individuals per hectare), or understory species with significant ground coverage.

(3) Of the 18 candidates for an ET cover, eight were commonly distributed in the OOMP woodland communities. These species have been considered as especially valuable candidates for natural habitat restoration at the KRL.

(4) The KRL currently does not resemble any of the OOMP woodland communities in terms of species composition; however, 68 species were identified at both sites.

(5) Succession is occurring at the landfill, indicating that eventually it may resemble the more mature forest communities surrounding the landfill that contains species associated with later stages of community development, such as Hamamelis virginiana, Prunus serotina, Quercus alba, and Quercus velutina.

(6) Five threatened and endangered plant species were identified at the KRL, further suggesting the landfill be used as a nature preserve for such endangered species.

In summary, the vegetation that has developed atop the sandy soil cover at the KRL contains 18 native perennial plant species considered appropriate for an ET cover. These species will be tested in model ET covers to validate our selection criteria. The plant community at the KRL is in the earlier stages of development. Although the landfill has little similarity in species composition with the four OOMP woodland communities, five threatened and endangered species were identified. We are recommending that it may be practical and cost effective to seed it with native plants and guide its successional development towards a plant community that is appropriate for an ET cover and habitat restoration.

The five threatened and endangered plant species ideally would be included in the restoration process to increase the value of the KRL as a nature preserve for plants that otherwise may be lost from this region.

References

Abella, S.R., Jaeger, J.F., Gehring, D.H., Jacksy, R.G., Menard, K.S. and High,

K.A.: 2001, ‘Restoring historic plant communities in the Oak Openings Region of

northwest Ohio’, Ecol. Rest. 19, 155-160.

Albright, W.H., and Benson, C.H.: 2001, ‘Alternative cover assessment program

2002 annual report’, Desert Research Institute, Publication No. 41182

Albright, W.H., Benson, C.H., Gee, G.W., Roesler, A.C., Abichou,

T., Apiwantragoon, P., Lyles, B.F., and Rock, S.A.: 2004,

‘Field water balance of landfill final covers’, J. Environ. Qual. 33, 2317-2332.

Bazzaz, F.A.: 1975, ‘Plant species diversity in old-field successional ecosystems

in southern Illinois’, Ecology 56, 485-488.

Benson, C.H., Abichou, T., and Wang, X.: 1999, ‘Test section installation

instructions: alternative cover assessment program’, Environmental Geotechnics

Report No. 99-3., Environmental Geotechnics Program, University of Wisconsin-

Madison, Madison, Wisconsin.

Benson, C.H., Albright, W.H., Roesler, A.C., and Abichou, T.: 2002,

‘Evaluation of final cover performance: Field data from the alternative cover

assessment program (ACAP)’, Proceedings from the Waste Management

Conference, Tucson, AZ, 24-28 Feb., 2002

Cooperrider, T.S., Cusick, A.W., and Kartesz, J.T.: 2001, Seventh Catalog of the

Vascular Plants of Ohio, The Ohio State University Press, Columbus, OH., 256 pp.

Cozzarelli, I.M., Suflita, J.M., Ulrich, G.A., Harris, S.H., Scholl, M.A.,

Schlottmann, J.L., and Christenson, S.: 2000, ‘Geochemical and microbiological methods for evaluating anaerobic processes in an aquifer contaminated by landfill leachate’, Environ. Sci. Tech. 34, 4025-4033.

Daubenmire, R.: 1959, ‘A canopy-coverage method of vegetational analysis’,

Northwest Sci. 33, 43-64.

Dwyer, S.F.: 1998, ‘Alternative landfill covers pass the test’, Civil Eng. 68, 30-52.

Dwyer, S.F.: 2001, ‘Finding a better cover’, Civil Eng. 71, 58-63.

Egler, F.E.: 1954, ‘Vegetation science concepts 1. Initial floristic composition, a factor in old-field vegetation development’, Vegetation 4, 412 – 417.

Foster, B.L., and Tilman, D.: 2000, ‘Dynamic and static views of succession:

testing the descriptive power of the chronosequence approach’, Plant Ecol. 146,

1-10.

Gordon, R.B.: 1969, ‘The natural vegetation of Ohio in pioneer days’, Ohio Biol

Surv. Bull. (New Series). 3, 1-109.

Green Ribbon Initiative: 2004, The Green Ribbon Initiative, www.oakopen.org.

Grundel, R., Pavlovic, N.B., and Sulzman, C.L.: 1998, ‘Habitat use by the endangered Karner blue butterfly in oak woodlands: the influence of canopy cover’, Biol. Conserv. 85, 47-53.

Hauser, V.L., Gill, M.D., Gimon, D.M., and Horin, J.D.: 2001, ‘Protocol for controlling contaminated groundwater by phytostabilzation’, Prepared for: Air

Force Center for Environmental Excellence, December 2001, Mitretek Systems,

San Antonio, TX, 167 pp.

Hauser, V.L., and Gimon, D.M.: 2004, ‘Evaluating evaportranspiration (ET) landfill cover performance using hydrologic models’, Prepared for: Air Force

Center for Environmental Excellence, January 2004, Mitretek Systems, San

Antonio, TX, 118 pp.

Hauser, V.L., Weand, B.L., and Gill, M.D.: 2001, ‘Natural covers for landfills and

buried waste’, J. Environ. Eng. 127, 768-775.

Horn, H.S.: 1974, ‘The ecology of secondary succession’, Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst.

5, 25-37.

Howard, L.F. and Lee, T.D.: 2003, ‘Temporal patterns of vascular plant diversity in southeastern New Hampshire forests’, For. Ecol. Manag., 185, 5 – 20.

Inouye, R.S., Huntly, N.J., Tilman, D., Tester, J.R.,Stillwell, M., and Zinnel, K.C.:

1987, ‘Old-field succession on a Minnesota sand plain’, Ecology 68, 12-26.

Licht, L.P., Aitchison, E., Schnabel, W., and English, M.: 2001, ‘Landfill capping with woodland ecosystems’, Pract. Per. Haz. Tox. Rad. Waste Man. 5, 175-184.

Licht, L., Aitchison, E., and Rock S.A.: 2004, ‘Evapotranspirative tree caps:

Research prototype results, full-scale case histories, and possible future designs’, SWANA Landfill Symnposium, Monterey, CA., 21-25 June, 2004.

Margalef, R.: 1963, ‘On certain unifying principles in ecology’, Am. Nat. 97, 357-

374.

Metroparks of the Toledo Area: 2005, Metroparks Toledo, www.metroparkstoledo.com/metroparks/

Moseley, E.L.: 1928, ‘Flora of the oak openings’, Proceedings of the Ohio

Academy of Science, 8 (special paper number 20), 79-134.

Odum, E.P.: 1969, ‘The strategy of ecosystem development’, Science 14, 262-

270.

Ohio Biological Survey.: 2000, www.ohiobiologicalsurvey.org

Pielou, E.C.: 1966, ‘The measurement of diversity in different types of biological collections’, J. Theor. Biol. 13, 131-141.

Real, R., and Vargas, J.M.: 1996, ‘The probablistic basis of Jaccard’s index of similarity’, Syst. Biol. 45, 380-385.

Rock, S.A.: 2003, ‘Vegetative covers for waste containment’, Adv. Biochem. Eng.

Biotechnol. 78, 157-170.

Roesler, A.C, Benson, C.H., and Albright, W.H.: 2002, ‘Field hydrology and model predictions for final covers in the alternative assessment program – 2002’,

Geo Engineering Report No. 02-08. Geo Engineering Program, University of

Wisconsin-Madison. Madison, Wisconsin, USA. 279 pp.

Sears, P.B.: 1926, ‘The natural vegetation of Ohio II. The prairies’, Ohio J. Sci.

26, 128-146.

Shannon, C.E., and Weaver, W.: 1963, The mathematical theory of

communication, Urbana, University of Illinois Press. 125 pp.

Simpson, E.H.: 1949, ‘Measurement of diversity’, Nature 163, 688.

Tilman, D.; 1985, ‘The resource-ration hypothesis of plant succession’, Am. Nat.,

125, 827 – 852.

USDA Forest Service: 2000, ‘Forest inventory analysis national core field guide.

Vol. 1., Field data collection procedure for phase 2 plots, Version 1.4’, USDA

Forest Service, Internal report. On file at USDA Forest Service, Washington

Office, Forest Inventory and Analysis, Washington, DC.

USDA, NRCS: 2004, ‘The plants database’, Version 3.5 (http://plants.usda.gov),

National Plant Data Center, Baton Rouge, LA 70874-4490 USA.

USEPA: 1993, ‘Solid waste disposal facility criteria technical manual’, 40 CFR

Part 258, Subpart D, Design Criteria, pp. 121-193, Office of Solid Waste and

Emergency Response (5306W), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

Washington, DC.

Vankat, J.L. and Snyder, G.W.: 1991, ‘Floristics of a chronosequence

corresponding to old field-deciduous forest succession in southwestern Ohio. I.

Undisturbed vegetation’, Bull. Torr. Bot. Club. 118, 365-376.

Voss, E.G.: 1972, Michigan Flora. Part I., Cranbook Institue of Science,

Bloomfield Hills, Michigan. 488 pp.

Voss, E.G.: 1985, Michigan Flora. Part II., Cranbook Institute of Science,

Bloomfield Hills, Michigan. 729 pp.

Voss, E.G.: 1996, Michigan Flora. Part III., Cranbook Institue of Science,

Bloomfield Hills, Michigan. 622 pp.

Weatherbase: 2005, Toledo, Ohio, www.weatherbase.com

Whittaker, R.H.: 1972, ‘Evolution and measurement of species diversity’, Taxon.

21, 213-251.

Yoon, J.R., Lee, K., Kwon, B.D., and Han, W.S.: 2003, ‘Geoelectrical surveys of the Nanjido waste landfill n Seoul, Korea’, Environ. Geol. 43, 654-666.

Appendix A

Vascular flora of the King Road Landfill and/or selected communities of the Oak Openings Metropark

Catalog of the plant species identified in the waste disposal parcels at the King Road Landfill, the two control sites, and the four selected plant communities at the Oak Openings Metropark. Each species identified includes species and common name, growth form, and description of their abundance in the study. The physiographic of each species to Ohio is abbreviated N = native: A = alien.

Cupressaceae Cypress Family

Juniperus virginiana L. Eastern Red Cedar N Tree Found only in the KRL SE corner control site.

Dennstaedtiaceae Hay-scented Fern Family

Pteridium aquilinum (L.) Huhn Bracken Fern N Forb Found only in the OOMP sand barren, oak savanna, and deciduous woodland communities.

Dryopteridaceae Wood Fern Family

Athrium filix-femina (L.) Roth ex Mert. Lady Fern N Forb Found only in the OOMP deciduous woodland community.

Osmundaceae Royal Fern Family

Osmunda cinnamomea L. Cinnamon Fern N Forb Found only in the OOMP near the base of a hill in the deciduous woodland community.

Osmunda regalis L. var. spectablis (Willd.) A. Gray Royal Fern N Forb Found only in the OOMP near the base of a hill in the deciduous woodland community.

Pinaceae Pine Family

Pinus strobus L. White Pine N Tree Seedling found in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1960 to 1963, and saplings were found in the OOMP sand barren community.

Monocotoledoneae

Araceae Arum Family

Arisaema dracontium (L.) Schott Green Dragon N Forb Commonly found in moist habitats, located in the KRL floodplain control site and in the OOMP floodplain community.

Arisaema triphyllum (L.) Schott Jack-in-the-pulpit N Forb Commonly found in moist habitats, located in the KRL floodplain control site and in the plots near the base of a hill in the OOMP deciduous forest community.

Symplocarpus foetidus (L.) Salisb. Ex Nutt. Skunk Cabbage N Forb Commonly found in moist habitats, located only in the OOMP plots near the base of a hill of the deciduous woodland community and in the floodplain community.

Commelinaceae Spiderwort Family

Commellina communis L. Asiatic Dayflower A Forb Found in two KRL waste disposal parcels operated from 1963 to 1969 and 1969 to 1976.

Cyperaceae Sedge Family

Carex cephalophlora Muhl. ex Willd. Oval-headed Sedge N Sedge Found only in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1954 to 1957.

Carex intumescens Rudge Bladder Sedge N Sedge Common in moist habitat: found in KRL floodplain control site and in the OOMP floodplain community.

Carex molesta Mack. ex Bright Troublesome Sedge N Sedge Found only in the OOMP oak savanna community.

Carex pensylvanica Lam. Pennsylvania Sedge N Sedge Found in two KRL waste disposal parcels operated from 1954 to 1957 and 1969 to 1976, the SE control site, and in three OOMP plant communities.

Carex rugosperma Mack. Low Sand Sedge N Sedge Found only in the OOMP sand barren and oak savanna communities.

Carex siccata Dewey Dry Spike Sedge N Sedge (State Endangered) Found only in the OOMP sand barren community.

Carex swanii (Fernald) Mack. Swan’s Sedge N Sedge Found only in the OOMP sand barren and oak savanna communities.

Cyperus lupulinus (Spreng.) Marcks subsp. macilentus (Fernald) Marcks Slender Umbrella Sedge N Sedge Found in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1963 to 1969 and in the OOMP sand barren and oak savanna communities.

Scirpus atrovirens Willd. Dark-green Bulrush N Sedge Found only in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1969 to 1976.

Scirpus pendulus Muhl. Rufous Bulrush N Sedge Found in two KRL waste disposal parcels operated from 1954 to 1957 and 1969 to 1976.

Juncaceae Rush Family

Juncus articulatus L. Jointed Rush N Grass Found only in the OOMP oak savanna community.

Juncus effusus L. Common Rush N Grass Found in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1969 to 1976 and the OOMP oak savanna community.

Juncus torreyi Coville Torrey’s Rush N Grass Found only in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1969 to 1976.

Liliaceae Lily Family

Medeola virginiana L. Indian Cucumber Root N Forb Found only in the OOMP deciduous woodland community.

Polygonatum biflorum (Walter) Elliot Smooth Solomon’s Seal N Forb Found only in the OOMP sand barren and deciduous woodland communities.

Polygonatum sp. Solomon’s Seal sp. Found only in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1969 to 1976.

Smilacina racemosa (L.) Desf. False Spikenard N Forb Found only in the OOMP deciduous woodland community.

Smilacina sp. Lily-of-the-valley sp. Found only in the OOMP oak savanna community.

Poaceae Grass Family

Agrostis gigantea Roth. Redtop A Grass Common at the KRL: found in four KRL waste disposal parcels, and in the OOMP oak savanna community.

Agrostis stolonifera L. var. palustris (Huds.) Farw. Creeping Bent Grass A Grass Found only in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1969 to 1976.

Alopecurus pratensis L. Meadow Foxtail A Grass Found only in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1969 to 1976.

Bromus inermis Leyss. Smooth Brome A Grass Common at the KRL: found in four waste disposal parcels.

Bromus japonicus Thunb. ex Murray Japanese Brome A Grass Common at the KRL: found in three waste disposal parcels and in the SE corner control site.

Bromus latiglumis (Shear) Hitchc. Ear-leaved Brome N Grass Found in the KRL floodplain control site and in OOMP deciduous woodland community.

Bromus pubescens Muhl. ex Willd. Woodland Brome N Grass Found in three KRL waste disposal parcels.

Dactylis glomerata L. Orchard Grass A Grass Found in the KRL waste disposal parcels operated from 1954 to 1957 and 1960 to 1963.

Danthonia spicata (L.) P. Beauv. ex Roem. & Shult. Poverty Grass N Grass Found in three KRL waste disposal parcels and in the OOMP sand barren and oak savanna communities.

Digitaria filiformis (L.) Koeler Slender Finger Grass N Grass (Presumed Extirpated) Found only in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1960 to 1963.

Echinochloa muricata (P. Beauv.) Fernal var. microstachya Wiegand Barnyard Grass N Grass Found only in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1960 to 1963.

Elymus repens (L.) Gould Quack Grass A Grass Common at the KRL: found in four waste disposal parcels.

Elymus trachycaulus (Link) Gould ex Shinners Bearded Wheat Grass N Grass (State Threatened) Found in the KRL waste disposal parcels operated from 1954 to 1957 and 1960 to 1963.

Elymus virginicus L. Virginia Wild Rye N Grass Found in the KRL waste disposal parcels operated from 1957 to 1960 and 1960 to 1963, the floodplain control site, and in the OOMP floodplain community.

Festuca ovina L. Sheep Fescue A Grass Found only in the OOMP sand barren and oak savanna communities.

Festuca subverticillata (Pers.) E.B. Alexeev. Nodding Fescue N Grass Found only in the OOMP floodplain community.

Leersia virginica Willd. White Grass N Grass Common of moist habitat: found in the KRL floodplain control site and in the OOMP floodplain community.

Lolium arundinaceae (Screb.) Darbysh. Tall Fescue A Grass Common at the KRL: found in four waste disposal parcels.

Lolium perenne L. Perennial Rye Grass A Grass Found in three KRL waste disposal parcels.

Muhlenbergia schreberi J.F. Gmel. Nimblewill N Grass Found only in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated form 1969 to 1976.

Panicum acuminatum Sw. var. fasiculatum (Torr.) Lelong Old-field Panic Grass N Grass Found only in the KRL SE corner control site.

Panicum acuminatum Sw. var. lindheimeri (Nash) Lelong Lindheimer’s Panic Grass N Grass (State Endangered) Found in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1969 to 1976 and in the OOMP sand barren and oak savanna communities.

Panicum clandestinum L. Deer’s Tongue Grass N Grass Found in the KRL waste disposal parcels operated from 1960 to 1963 and 1969 to 1976 and in the SE corner control site.

Panicum columbianum Scribn. American Panic Grass N Grass Common at the KRL; found in three KRL waste disposal parcels, the SE corner control site, and in the OOMP sand barren and oak savanna communities.

Panicum latifolilum L. Broad-leaved Panic Grass N Grass Found only in the OOMP deciduous woodland community.

Panicum oligosanthes Schult. var. scribnerian (Nash) Fernald Scribner’s Rosette Grass N Grass Found in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1960 to 1963 and in the OOMP sand barren and oak savanna communities.

Phleum pretense L. Timothy A Grass Found in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1969 to 1976 and in the SE corner control site.

Poa compressa L. Canada Blue Grass A Grass Common at the KRL; found in three KRL waste disposal parcels, the SE corner control site, and in the OOMP sand barren and oak savanna communities.

Poa pratensis L. Kentucky Blue Grass A Grass Common at the KRL: found in three KRL waste disposal parcels and in the OOMP oak savanna community.

Setaria glauca (L.) P. Beauv. Yellow Foxtail Grass A Grass Common at the KRL: found in three waste disposal parcels.

Setaria viridis (L.) P. Beauv. Green Foxtail Grass A Grass Found in the KRL waste disposal parcels operated from 1957 to 1960 and 1960 to 1963 and in the SE corner control site.

Smilacaceae Catbrier Family

Smilax hispida Muhl. ex Torr. Bristly Greenbrier N Shrub Found only in the OOMP deciduous woodland community.

Smilax rotundifolia L. Common Greenbrier N Shrub Found only in the OOMP sand barren and deciduous woodland communities.

Typhaceae Cat-tail Family

Typha latifolia L. Broadleaf Cattail N Forb Common in moist habitat; found in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1969 to 1976 near standing water.

Dicotoledoneae

Aceraceae Maple Family

Acer negundo L. Box Elder N Tree Common in the KRL: found in four KRL waste disposal parcels, both control sites, and in the OOMP floodplain community.

Acer rubrum L. Red Maple N Tree Found only in the OOMP in the floodplain, sand barren, and deciduous woodland communities.

Acer saccharinum L. Silver Maple N Tree Common in moist habitat: found in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1963 to 1969, the floodplain control site, and in the OOMP floodplain community.

Anacardiaceae Sumac Family

Rhus copallina L. var. latifolia Engl. Dwarf Sumac N Tree Saplings only found in the OOMP sand barren community.

Rhus typhina L. Staghorn Sumac N Tree Found in two KRL waste disposal parcels operated from 1957 to 1960 and 1963 to 1969.

Toxicodendron radicans (L.) Kuntze var. radicans Poison Ivy N Vine Found in all KRL waste disposal parcels and in the OOMP floodplain community.

Apiaceae Carrot Family

Cryptotaenia canadensis (L.) DC. Canadian Honewort N Forb Commonly found in moist habitats, located in the KRL floodplain control site, and in the OOMP floodplain community.

Daucus carota L. Wild Carrot A Forb Found in all KRL waste disposal parcels.

Araliaceae Ginseng Family

Aralia nudicaulis L. Wild Sarsaparilla N Forb Found in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1963 to 1969 and in the OOMP deciduous woodland community.

Aristochiaceae Birthwort Family

Asarum canadense L. Wild Ginger N Forb Found only in the KRL floodplain control site.

Asclepiadaceae Milkweed Family

Asclepias exaltata L. Poke Milkweed N Forb Found in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1954 to 1957 and in the SE corner control site.

Asclepias incarnata L. Swamp Milkweed N Forb Found only in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1969 to 1976 near a depression with standing water at the KRL.

Asclepias syriaca L. Common Milkweed N Forb Found only in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1969 to 1976.

Asclepias tuberosa L. Butterfly Milkweed N Forb Found in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1957 to 1960 and in the OOMP oak savanna community.

Asclepias verticillata L. Whorled Milkweed N Forb Found the KRL waste disposal parcels operated from 1960 to 1963 and 1969 to 1976.

Asteraceae Aster Family

Achillea millefolium L. Yarrow N Forb Found in three KRL waste disposal parcels and in the OOMP oak savanna community.

Ambrosia artemisiifolia L. Annual Ragweed N Forb Very common; located in all five KRL waste disposal parcels, both control sites, and in the OOMP sand barren community.

Ambrosia trifida L. Great Ragweed N Forb Found in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1957 to 1960 and in the SE corner control site.

Aster lanceolatus Willd var. simplex (Willd.) A. G. Jones Panicled Aster N Forb Common in moist habitat: located in the KRL waste disposal parcel operaed from 1963 to 1969, the floodplain control site, and in the OOMP floodplain community.

Aster macrophyllus L. Large-leaved Aster N Forb Found only in the OOMP deciduous woodland community.

Chrysanthemum leucanthemum L. Ox-eye Daisy A Forb Found in only the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1957 to 1960.

Conyza canadensis (L.) Cronquist Horseweed N Forb Found in three KRL waste disposal parcels and in the SE corner control site.

Erigeron annuus (L.) Pers. Daisy Fleabane N Forb Very common: found in all five KRL waste disposal parcels and in the SE corner control site.

Erigeron pulchellus Michx. var. pulchellus Robin’s Plantain N Forb Common species, found in four KRL waste disposal parcels, the SE corner control site, and in the OOMP sand barren and oak savanna communities.

Eupatorium album L. White Thoroughwort N Forb (State Threatened) Common at the KRL: found in four KRL waste disposal parcels and in the SE corner control site.

Euthamia graminifolia (L.) Nutt. Grass-leaved Goldenrod N Forb Found in the KRL waste disposal parcels operated from 1960 to 1963 and 1963 to 1969, and in the OOMP oak savanna community.

Euthamia tenuifolia (Pursh) Nutt. var. tenuifolia Lance-leaved Goldenrod N Forb Found in two KRL waste disposal parcels operated from 1960 to 1963 and 1969 to 1976.

Helianthus divaricatus L. Woodland Sunflower N Forb Found in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1969 to 1976 and in the SE corner control site.

Heliopsis helianthoides (L.) Sweet Smooth Ox-eye N Forb Found only in the OOMP floodplain community.

Hieracium caespitosum Dumort Meadow Hawkweed A Forb Found only in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1954 to 1957.

Krigia virginica (L.) Willd. Dwarf Dandelion N Forb (State Threatened) Found only in the OOMP sand barren and oak savanna communities.

Liatris sp. Blazing Star sp. Found only in the OOMP oak savanna community.

Prenanthes alba L. White Lettuce N Forb Found only in the OOMP deciduous woodland community.

Rudbeckia lacianta L. var. laciniata Cut-leaf Coneflower N Forb Found only in the OOMP floodplain community.

Solidago canadensis L. var. canadensis Canada Goldenrod N Forb Found in four KRL waste disposal parcels.

Sonchus sp. Sow-thistle sp. Found only in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1960 to 1963.

Taraxacum officinale Weber ex F.H. Wigg. Common Dandelion A Forb Found in the KRL waste disposal parcels operated from 1954 to 1957 and 1963 to 1969.

Tragopogon dubius Scop. Yellow Salsify A Forb Found in four KRL waste disposal parcels.

Balsaminaceae Touch-me-not Family

Impatiens capensis Meerb. Spotted Touch-me-not N Forb Common in moist habitat: found in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1954 to 1957, the floodplain control site, and in the OOMP floodplain community.

Impatiens pallida Nutt. Pale Touch-me-not N Forb Common in moist habitat: found only in the OOMP floodplain community.

Betulaceae Birch Family

Betula pumila L. Bog Birch N (State Threatened) Found only saplings in the OOMP floodplain community.

Corylus americana Walter American Hazelnut N Shrub Found only seedlings in the OOMP deciduous woodland community.

Bignonaceae Trumpet-creeper Family

Campsis radicans (L.) Seem. ex Bureau Trumpet Creeper N Vine Found only in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1960 to 1963.

Catalpa bignonoides Walter Common Catalpa A Tree Found only in the KRL SE corner control site.

Catalpa speciosa (Warder) Warder ex Engelm. Northern Catalpa A Tree Found in four KRL waste disposal parcels.

Boraginaceae Borage Family

Hackelia virginiana (L.) I. M. Johnst. Virginia Stickseed N Forb Found only in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1954 to 1957.

Lithospermum officinale L. European Gromwell A Forb Found in four KRL waste disposal parcels, the SE corner control site, and in the OOMP floodplain community.

Brassicaceae Mustard Family

Alliaria petiolata (M. Bieb.) Cavara & Grande Garlic Mustard A Forb Very common: found in all KRL waste disposal parcels, both control sites, and in the OOMP floodplain and deciduous woodland communities .

Barbarea vulgaris R. Br. Yellow Rocket A Forb Found in three KRL waste disposal parcels.

Lepidium campestre (L.) R. Br. Field Pepperweed A Forb Found in four KRL waste disposal parcels.

Thlaspi arvense L. Field Pennycress A Forb Found in the KRL SE corner control site and in the OOMP oak savanna community.

Caesalpiniaceae Caesalpinia Family

Gledistia triacanthos L. Honey Locust N Tree Found in the KRL waste disposal parcels operated from 1954 to 1957 and 1963 to 1969 and in the SE corner control site.

Campanulaceae Bellflower Family

Campanula americana L. American Bellflower N Forb Found only in the OOMP floodplain community.

Caprifoliaceae Honeysuckle Family

Lonicera maackii (Rupr.) Maxim. Amur Honeysuckle A Shrub Found in two KRL waste disposal parcels operated from1963 to 1969 and 1969 to 1976.

Lonicera tatarica L. Tartarian Honeysuckle A Shrub Very common; found in all the KRL waste disposal parcels, and both control sites.

Caryophyllaceae Pink Family

Arenaria serpyllifolia L. Thyme-leaved Sandwort A Forb Found in two KRL waste disposal parcels operated from 1954 to 1957 and 1957 to 1960 and in the SE corner control site.

Dianthus armeria L. Deptford Pink A Forb Very common: found in all the KRL waste disposal parcels, the SE corner control site, and in the OOMP oak savanna community.

Paronychia canadensis (L.) A.W. Wood Forked Chickweed N Forb Found only in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1960 to 1963.

Saponaria officinalis L. Bouncing Bet A Forb Found in two KRL waste disposal parcels operated from 1954 to 1957 and 1960 to 1963.

Silene latifolia Poir. White Campion A Forb Found in four KRL waste disposal parcels.

Silene virginica L. Fire Pink N Forb Found only in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from1969 to 1976.

Silene vulgaris (Moench) Garcke Bladder Campion A Forb Found in only the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1960 to 1963.

Celastraceae Bittersweet Family

Celastrus scandens L. American Bittersweet N Vine Found in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1954 to 1957 and in the SE corner control site.

Cistaceae Rock-rose Family

Helianthemum canadense (L.) Michx. Rockrose N Forb (Potentially State Threatened) Found only in the OOMP sand barren community.

Clusiaceae St. John’s-wort Family

Hypericum perforatum L. Common St. Johnswort A Forb Found in four KRL waste disposal parcels and in the SE corner control site.

Hypericum prolificum L. Shrubby St. Johnswort N Shrub Found only in the OOMP oak savanna community.

Cornaceae Dogwood Family

Cornus amomum Miller Silky Dogwood N Shrub Found in three KRL waste disposal parcels and in the SE corner control site.

Cornus drummondi C. A. Mey. Roughleaf Dogwood N Shrub Found in two KRL waste disposal parcels operated from 1954 to 1957 and 1960 to 1963 and in the SE corner control site.

Cornus florida L. Flowering Dogwood N Shrub Found only in the OOMP oak savanna and deciduous woodland communities.

Cornus racemosa Lam. Gray Dogwood N Shrub Found in three KRL waste disposal parcels, the floodplain control site, and in the OOMP floodplain community.

Cornus stolonifera Michx. (cultivated) Red Oisier Dogwood N Shrub Found only in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1954 to 1957.

Dipsacaceae Teasel Family

Dipsacus fullonum L. Common Teasel A Forb Found only in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1969 to 1976.

Elaeagnaceae Oleaster Family

Elaeagnus angustiolia L. Russian Olive A Tree Found in two KRL waste disposal parcels operated from 1954 to 1957 and 1960 to 1963, and in the OOMP oak savanna community.

Equisetaceae Horsetail Family

Equisetum arvense L. Field Horsetail N Forb Found only in the OOMP floodplain community.

Ericaceae Heath Family

Gaultheria procumbens L. Wintergreen N Forb Found only in the OOMP deciduous woodland community.

Vaccinium pallidum Aiton Blue-ridge Blueberry N Shrub Found in the OOMP oak savanna and deciduous woodland woodland.

Vaccinium vacillans Kalm Early Low-bush Blueberry N Shrub Found only in the OOMP deciduous woodland community.

Euphorbiaceae Spurge Family

Acalypha virginica L. var. rhomboidea (Raf.) Cooperr. Three-seeded Mercury N Forb Found in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1957 to 1960 and in the SE corner control site.

Euphorbia corollata L. Flowering Spurge N Forb Found only in the OOMP sand barren and oak savanna communities.

Euphorbia cyparissas L. Cypress Spurge A Forb Found only in the KRL waste disposal parcels operated from 1957 to 1960 and 1960 to 1963.

Euphorbia nutans Lag. Spotted Spurge N Forb Found only in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1957 to 1960.

Fabaceae Pea Family

Lespedeza capitata Michx. Bush-clover N Forb Found only in the OOMP sand barren and oak savanna communities.

Lupinus perennis L. Wild Lupine N Forb (Potentially State Threatened) Found in the KRL SE corner control site and in the OOMP sand barren community.

Medicago lupulina L. Black Medick A Forb Common at the KRL: found in four waste disposal parcels and in the SE corner control site.

Melilotus albus Medik. White Sweet Clover A Forb Common at the KRL: found on all the waste disposal parcels and in the SE corner control site.

Melilotus officinalis (L.) Pall. Yellow Sweet Clover A Forb Common at the KRL: found in all the waste disposal parcels and in the SE corner control site.

Robinia pseudoacacia L. Black Locust A Tree Common at the KRL: found in all the waste disposal parcels and in the SE corner control site.

Trifolium pretense L. Red Clover A Forb Found in the KRL waste disposal parcels operated from 1954 to 1957 and 1960 to 1963.

Trifolium repens L. White Clover A Forb Found only in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1957 to 1960.

Fagaceae Beech Family

Quercus alba L. White Oak N Tree Found in the KRL SE corner control site and in the OOMP oak savanna and deciduous woodland communities.

Quercus bicolor Willd. Swamp White Oak N Tree Common in moist habitat: found in the KRL floodplain control site and in the OOMP floodplain community.

Quercus rubra L. Red Oak N Tree Found in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1969 to 1976, the SE corner control site, and in the OOMP sand barren, oak savanna, and deciduous woodland communities.

Quercus velutina Lam. Black Oak N Tree Common at the KRL: found in three KRL waste disposal parcels, the SE corner control site, and in all four OOMP plant communities.

Geraniaceae Geranium Family

Geranium maculatum L. Wild Geranium N Forb Found in three KRL waste disposal parcels and in the SE corner control site.

Hamamelidaceae Witch-hazel Family

Hamamelis virginiana L. Witch Hazel N Tree Found in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1954 to 1957, the SE corner control site, and in the OOMP deciduous woodland community.

Hippocastanaceae Horse-chestnut Family

Aesculus glabra Willd. Ohio Buckeye N Tree Common in moist habitat: found only in the KRL floodplain control site.

Juglandaceae Walnut Family

Juglans nigra L. Black Walnut N Tree Found in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1963 to 1969, the SE corner control site, and in the OOMP floodplain community. Lamiaceae Mint Family

Agastache nepetoides (L.) Kuntze Yellow Giant Hyssop N Forb Found only in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1954 to 1957.

Collinsonia canadensis L. Richweed N Forb Found in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1969 to 1976, and the OOMP floodplain community.

Glechoma hederaceae L. Ground Ivy A Forb Found only in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1954 to 1957.

Leonurus cardiaca L. Motherwort A Forb Common at the KRL: found in three waste disposal parcels and in the SE corner control site.

Lycopus americanus Muhl. ex W.P.C. Barton Cut-leaved Water-horehound N Forb Found only in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1969 to 1976.

Monarda fistulosa L. Wild Bergamot N Forb Found in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1963 to 1969 and in the SE corner control site.

Nepeta cataria L. Catnip A Forb Common at the KRL: found in four waste disposal parcels and in the SE corner control site.

Stachys aspera Michx. Hyssop Hedge Nettle N Forb Found only in the OOMP floodplain community.

Stachys tenuifolia Willd. Common Hedge Nettle N Forb Found only in the OOMP floodplain community.

Lauraceae Laurel Family

Lindera benzoin (L.) Blume var. benzoin Spice Bush N Shrub Common in moist habitat: found in the KRL floodplain control site, and in the OOMP floodplain and deciduous woodland communities

Sassafras albidum (Nutt.) Nees Sassafras N Tree Found in the KRL SE corner control site, and in the OOMP sand barren, oak savanna, and deciduous woodland communities.

Lythraceae Loosestrife Family

Lythrum alatum Pursh Winged Loosestrife N Forb Found only in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1969 to 1976.

Malvaceae Mallow Family

Hibiscus trionum L. Flower-of-an-hour A Forb Found only in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1960 to 1963.

Moraceae Mulberry Family

Morus alba L. White Mulberry A Tree Common at the KRL: found in three waste disposal parcels and in the SE corner control site, and in the OOMP floodplain community.

Myriaceae Bayberry Family

Comptonia peregrine (L.) J.M. Coult. Sweet Fern N Shrub (State Threatened) Found only in the OOMP oak savanna community.

Oleaceae Olive Family

Fraxinus americana L. var. americana White Ash N Tree Common of moist habitat: found only in the OOMP floodplain community.

Fraxinus pennsylvanica Marshall var. pennsylvanica Green Ash N Tree Common at the KRL: found in all the waste disposal parcels and in the floodplain control site.

Fraxinus pennsylvanica Marshall var. subintegerrima (M. Vahl.) Fernald Red Ash N Tree Common at the KRL, found in three waste disposal parcels and in both control sites.

Fraxinus quadrangulata Michx. Blue Ash N Tree Found only in the KRL SE corner control site at the KRL.

Ligustrum vulgare L. Common Privet A Shrub Common at the KRL: found in three waste disposal parcels.

Onagraceae Evening-primrose Family Circaeae lutetiana L. var. canadensis L. Enchanter’s Nightshade N Forb Found in the KRL waste disposal parcels operated from 1954 to 1957 and 1957 to 1960, the SE corner control site, and in the OOMP floodplain community.

Oenothera biennis L. var. biennis Common Evening Primrose N Forb Found in the KRL waste disposal parcels operated from 1957 to 1960 and 1960 to 1963, and in the OOMP sand barren and oak savanna communities.

Oxalidaceae Wood-sorrel Family

Oxalis stricta L. Common Yellow Wood-sorrel N Forb Common at the KRL: found in all waste disposal parcels and in the SE corner control site.

Phytolaccaceae Pokeweed Family

Phytolacca americana L. American Pokeweed N Forb Found in the KRL waste disposal parcels operated from 1963 to 1969 and 1969 to 1976.

Plantaginaceae Plantain Family

Plantago lanceolata L. English Plantain A Forb Found in three KRL waste disposal parcels.

Plantago major L. Common Plantain A Forb Found in three KRL waste disposal parcels.

Polygalaceae Milkwort Family

Polygala polygama Walter Racemed Milkwort N Forb (State Threatened) Found only in the OOMP sand barren and the oak savanna communities.

Polygonaceae Buckwheat Family

Polygonum convolvulus L. Black Bindweed A Vine Common at the KRL: found in four waste disposal parcels and in the SE corner control site.

Polygonum pensylvanicum L. Pennsylvania Smartweed N Forb Found in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1960 to 1963 and the OOMP floodplain community.

Polygonum persicaria L. Lady’s Thumb A Forb Found only in the OOMP floodplain community.

Polygonum virginianum L. Jumpseed N Forb Found in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1963 to 1969, the floodplain control site, and in the OOMP floodplain community.

Rumex acetosella L. Red Sorrel A Forb Found only in the OOMP sand barren community.

Rumex crispus L. Curly Dock A Forb Common at the KRL: found in all the waste disposal parcels and the SE corner control site.

Rumex obtusifolius L. Bitter Dock A Forb Found only in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1954 to 1957.

Primulaceae Primrose Family

Lysimachia ciliata L. Fringed Loosestrife N Forb Found only in the KRL floodplain control site.

Lysimachia nummularia L. Moneywort A Forb Common in moist habitat: found in the KRL floodplain control site and the OOMP floodplain community.

Lysimachia quadrifolia L. Whorled Loosestrife N Forb Found in the KRL floodplain control site and the OOMP oak savanna community.

Ranunculaceae Buttercup Family

Ranunculus hispidus Michx. var. hispidus Hispid Buttercup N Forb Found in the KRL floodplain control site and the OOMP oak savanna community.

Ranunculus hispidus Michx. var. nitidus (Chapm.) T. Duncan Swamp Buttercup N Forb Found only in the KRL floodplain control site.

Thalictrum thalictroides (L.) A. J. Eames & B. Boivin Rue Anemone N Forb Found in the KRL SE corner control site and in the OOMP floodplain community.

Rhamnaceae Buckthorn Family

Ceanothus americanus L. New Jersey Tea N Shrub Found only in the SE corner control site.

Rhamnus cathartica L. Common Buckthorn A Tree Common at the KRL: found in four waste disposal parcels and in the SE corner control site.

Rosaceae Rose Family

Amelanchier arborea (F. Michx.) Fernald Downy Serviceberry N Tree Found only in the OOMP deciduous woodland community.

Crataegus spp. Hawthorn spp. Common at the KRL: found in three waste disposal parcels and in the SE corner control site.

Fragaria vesca L. Woodland Strawberry N Shrub Found only in the KRL SE corner control site.

Geum canadense Jacq. White Avens N Forb Common at the KRL, found in three waste disposal parcels and both control sites, and in the OOMP floodplain community.

Photinia floribunda (Lindl.) K. R. Robertson & J. B. Phipps Chokeberry N Shrub Found in only the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1969 to 1976.

Potentilla recta L. Sulphur Cinquefoil A Forb Common at the KRL: found in four of the waste disposal parcels.

Potentilla spp. Cinquefoil spp. Found in the OOMP sand barren and oak savanna communities.

Prunus americana Marshall American Plum N Tree Found in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1963 to 1969 and in the SE corner control site.

Prunus avium (L.) L. Sweet Cherry A Shrub Found only in the KRL SE corner control site.

Prunus serotina Ehrh. Black Cherry N Tree Common plant: found in four waste disposal parcels and the southeast corner control site at the KRL and in the OOMP sand barren, oak savanna, and deciduous woodland communities.

Prunus sp. Prunus sp. Found only in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1963 to 1969.

Prunus virginiana L. Choke Cherry N Shrub Found in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1969 to 1976 and the SE corner control site, and in the OOMP sand barren community.

Rubus allegheniensis Porter Allegheny Blackberry N Shrub Found only in the OOMP sand barren community.

Rubus flagellaris Willd. Northern Dewberry N Shrub Common plant, found in three waste disposal parcels and the southeast corner control site at the KRL, and in the OOMP sand barren, oak savanna, and deciduous woodland communities.

Rubus hispidus L. Bristly Dewberry N Shrub Found only in the OOMP deciduous woodland community.

Rubus occidentalis L. Black Raspberry N Shrub Common at the KRL: found in all the waste disposal parcels and the SE corner control site.

Rubus pensilvanicus Poir. Pennsylvania Blackberry N Shrub Found only in the KRL SE corner control site.

Spirea alba Du Roi var. alba Meadow-sweet N Shrub Found only in the OOMP oak savanna community.

Rubiaceae Madder Family

Galium asprellum Michx. Rough Bedstraw N Forb Found only in the OOMP floodplain community.

Galium circaezans Michx. Wild Licorice N Forb Found in the KRL SE corner control site and in the OOMP oak savanna community.

Rutaceae Rue Family

Zanthoxylum americanum Mill. Prickly-ash N Tree Found only in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1969 to 1976.

Saliaceae Willow Family

Populus deltoides W. Bartram ex Marshall Cottonwood N Tree Common at the KRL: found in all the waste disposal parcels and the SE corner control site, and in the OOMP sand barren and oak savanna communities.

Salix discolor Muhl. Pussy Willow N Shrub Found only in the OOMP sand barren community.

Salix humilis var. tristis (Aiton) Griggs Prairie Willow N Shrub Found only in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1960 to 1963.

Salix nigra Marshall Black Willow N Tree Found only in the OOMP floodplain community.

Scrophulariaceae Figwort Family

Penstemon digitalis Nutt. ex Sims Bearded Foxglove N Forb Found only in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1960 to 1963.

Verbascum blattaria L. Moth Mullein A Forb Found in the KRL waste disposal parcels operated from 1954 to 1957 and 1963 to 1969.

Verbascum thapsus L. Common Mullein A Forb Common at the KRL, found in all the waste disposal parcels and the SE corner control site, and in the OOMP oak savanna community.

Veronica arvensis L. Corn Speedwell A Forb Found in the KRL waste disposal parcels operated from 1957 to 1960 and 1960 to 1963.

Simaroubaceae Quassia Family

Ailanthus altissima (Mill.) Swingle Tree-of-heaven A Tree Common at the KRL: found in four waste disposal parcels and the SE corner control site.

Solanaceae Nightshade Family

Datura stramonium L. Jimsonweed A Forb Found only in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1957 to 1960.

Physalis heterophylla Nees Clammy Ground Cherry N Forb Found only in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1957 to 1960.

Solanum carolinense L. Horsenettle A Forb Found in three KRL waste disposal parcels.

Tiliaceae Linden Family

Tilia americana L. American Basswood N Tree Common of moist habitat: found only in the KRL floodplain control site.

Ulmaceae Elm Family

Celtis occidentalis L. Hackberry N Tree Common in moist habitat: found in the KRL waste disposal parcels operated from 1963 to 1969 and 1969 to 1976 and in the floodplain control site, and the OOMP floodplain community.

Ulmus americana L. American Elm N Tree Common of moist habitat: found in the OOMP floodplain community, and in the KRL waste disposal parcels operated from 1963 to 1969 and 1969 to 1976 and floodplain control site.

Ulmus pumila L. Chinese Elm A Tree Common at the KRL: found in all the waste disposal parcels and in the SE corner control site.

Ulmus rubra Muhl. Slippery Elm N Tree Found in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1969 to 1976 and the SE control site.

Urticaceae Nettle Family

Boehmeria cylindrica (L.) Sw. False Nettle N Forb Found in KRL waste disposal parcels operated from 1960 to 1963 and 1969 to 1976 and in the floodplain control site.

Laportea canadensis (L.) Wedd. Wood Nettle N Forb Common in moist habitat: found in the KRL floodplain control site and the OOMP floodplain community.

Pilea pumila (L.) A. Gray Clearweed N Forb Common in moist habitat: found in the KRL floodplain control site and the OOMP floodplain community.

Urtica dioica L. var. procera Tall Nettle N Forb Found in the KRL waste disposal parcel operated from 1957 to 1960 and the OOMP floodplain community.

Verbenaceae Vervain Family

Verbena urticifolia L. White Vervain N Forb Found in the KRL waste disposal parcels operated from 1963 to 1969 and 1969 to 1976 and the OOMP floodplain community.

Violaceae Violet Family

Viola pubescens Aiton Common Yellow Violet N Forb Found only in the KRL floodplain control site.

Viola sagittata Aiton Arrow-leaved Violet N Forb Found only in the OOMP oak savanna community.

Vitaceae Grape Family

Parthenocissus quinquefolia (L.) Planch. Virginia Creeper A Vine Common in most habitats, found in allof the KRL waste disposal parcels and control sites, and in the OOMP floodplain and deciduous woodland communities.

Vitis aestivalis Michx. Summer Grape N Vine Common in most habitats, found in all of the KRL waste disposal parcels and control sites, and the OOMP oak savanna community.