DOCSLIB.ORG

The Ecology of Atlantic White Cedar Wetlands: a Community Profile

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

The ecology of Atlantic white cedar wetlands: a community profile Item Type monograph Authors Laderman, Aimlee D.; Brody, Michael; Pendleton , Edward Publisher U.S. Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, National Wetlands Research Center Download date 29/09/2021 17:20:30 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/1834/25505 Biological Report 85(7.21) July 1989 THE ECOLOGY OF ATLANTIC WHITE CEDAR WETLANDS: A COMMUNITY PROFILE CUPRESSUS THYOIDES. L Fish and Wildlife Service U.S. Department of the interior Cover credit: Sprague, Sgt. Charles. 1896. The Siiva of North America. Vol. X. Houghton Mifflin, Boston. Biological Report 85(7.21) July 1989 THE ECOLOGY OF ATLANTIC WHITE CEDAR WETLANDS: A COMMUNITY PROFILE by Aimlee D. Laderman Marine Biological Laboratory Woods Hole, MA 02543 Project Officers Michael Brody Edward Pendleton National Wetlands Research Center U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1010 Gause Boulevard Slidell, LA 70458 Prepared for U.S. Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service Research and Development National Wetlands Research Center Washington, DC 20240 The mention of trade names does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use by the Federal Government. Library of Congress Cahlqing-in-Publication Dutu Laderman, Airnlee D. The ecology of Atlantic white cedar wetlands. (Biological report ; 85(7.21) "October 1988 Bibliography: p. Supt. of Docs. no.: 149.89/2:85(7.21) 1. Wetland ecology-Atlantic States. 2. Atlantic white cedar--Atlantic States. I. Brody, Michael. 11. Pendleton, Edward C. Ill. National Wetlands Research Center. IV. Title. V. Series: Biological report (Washington, D.C.) ; 85-7.21. QH104.5.AWl-34 1988 574.5'26325'097 88-600399 This report may be cited as: Laderman, A.D. 1989. The ecology of the Atlantic white cedar wetlands: a community profile. U.S. Fish Wtldl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 85(7.21). 114 pp. PREFACE This monograph on the ecology of Atlantic white cedar wetlands is one of a series of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service profiles of important freshwater wetland ecosystems of the United States. The purpose of the profile is to describe the extent, components, functioning, history, and treatment of these wetlands. It is intended to provide a useful reference to relevant scientific information and a synthesis of the available literature. Theworld range of Atlantic white cedar (Chamaecyparis thyoides) is limited to a ribbon of freshwater wetlands within 200 km of the Atlantic and Gulf coasts of the United States, extending from mid-Maine to mid-Florida and Mississippi. Often in inaccessible sites and difficult to traverse, cedar wetlands contain distinctive suites of plant species. Highly valued as commercial timber since the early days of European colonization of the continent, the cedar and its habitat are rapidly disappearing. This profile describes the Atlantic white cedar and the bogs and swamps it dominates or codominates throughout its range, discussing interrelationships with other habitats, putative origins and migration patterns, substrate biogeochemistry, associated plant and animal species (with attention to those that are rare, endangered, or threatened regionally or nationally), and impacts of both natural and anthropogenic distur- bance. Research needs for each area are outlined. Chapters are devoted to the practices and problems of harvest and management, and to an examination of a large preserve recently acquired by the USFWS, the Alligator River National Wildlife Refuge in North Carolina. CONVERSION FACTORS Metric to U.S. Customary Multiply To Obtain millimeters (mm) inches centimeters (cm) inches meters (m) feet meters (m) fathoms kilometers (km) statute miles kilometers (km) nautical miles square meters (m2) square feet square kilometers (km2) square miles hectares (ha) acres liters (I) gallons cubic meters (m3) cubic feet cubic meters (m3) acre-feet milligrams (mg) ounces grams (g) ounces kilograms (kg) pounds metric tons (t) pounds metric tons (t) short tons kilocalories (kcal) British thermal units Celsius degrees (OC) Fahrenheit degrees U.S. Customary to Metric inches millimeters inches centimeters feet (it) meters fathoms meters statute miles (mi) kilometers nautical miles (nmi) kilometers square feet (ft2) square meters square miles (mi2) square kilometers acres hectares gallons (gal) liters cubic feet (ft3) cubic meters acre-feet cubic meters ounces (02) milligrams ounces (02) grams pounds (Ib) kilograms pounds (Ib) metric tons short tons (ton) metric tons British thermal units ptu) kilocalories Fahrenheit degrees ( F) Celsius degrees CONTENTS ea9tl. PREFACE ................................................... iii CONVERSION FACTORS........................................... iv FIGURES ................................................... TABLES ............................................VIIV! ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...........................................viii CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 General Features .......................................... 1 1.2 Classif~cation ............................................ 2 1.3 Relationshi with Adjacent Habitats ................................ 2 1.4 Origins ancf~i~rationof Chamaecyparis fhyories Forests .................... 4 CHAPTER 2 REGIONAL OVERVIEW 2.1 Introduction ............................................10 2.2 Glaciated Northeast .........................................10 2.3 The North Coastal Plain ...................................... 16 2.4 Virginia and the Carolinas .................................... 19 2.5 ~uni~erswamps of the southeast .................................22 CHAPTER 3 CHAMAECYPARIS THYOIDES: LIFE HISTORY AND ECOLOGY 3.1 Morpholo y ............................................. 26 3.2 Silvical ~aits............................................ 27 CHAPTER 4 STRUCTURE AND FUNCTION OF THE SUBSTRATE 4.1 Hdroloy .............................................. 30 4.2 dter~Remistty .......................................... 31 4.3 Soils .................................................32 4.4 Production and Decom osition .................................. 33 4.5 Soil and plant Tissue cRmis3 .................................. 33 4.6 Interactions; Research Need ..................................34 CHAPTER 5 BIOLOGICAL COMPONENTS OF ATLANTIC WHITE CEDAR WETLANDS 5.1 Adaptations to the Wetland Environment ............................. 36 5.2 Flora .................................................36 5.3 Fauna ..............................................37 5.4 Fiesearch ~eeds ..........................................45 CHAPTER 6 MANAGEMENT AND HARVEST 6.1 Impacts of Disturbance ....................................... 46 6.2 Management ............................................ 52 6.3 Commercial Use .......................................... 54 6.4 Management Guidelines ...................................... 57 6.5 The Federal Role .......................................... 61 6.6 Research Requirements ...................................... 61 CHAPTER 7 A CASE STUDY: ATLANTIC WHITE CEDAR WETLANDS IN DARE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA by J.H. Moore and A.D. Laderman 7.1 Overview .............................................. 67 7.2 Physical Characteristics ...................................... 70 7.3 Vegetation .............................................. 72 7.4 Fauna ................................................ 76 7.5 Management Problems and Options ................................ 78 REFERENCES ................. APPENDIXES: A ~ssociatedFlora: A Distribution Checklist by A.D. Laderman and D.B. Ward .......... 91 B Associated Fauna ..........................................108 C Hydric Soils .............................................11 0 D Personal Communications and Acknowledgments: Reference ..................111 FIGURES Number w Distrlb@i~n0fChamaecyperis~hy~id~s.............................. Atlantic wh#e cedar habitats in the palustrine system ........................ Atlanticwhtte cedar habkats in the d'verine system ......................... Cumloden Swamp. Falmouth, ~~ssachusefis............................ Origlnsof glacial kettleand outwash cedarwetlands ........................ 5 Originsof backswamp cedarwetlands ...............................5 Atlantic whhe cedar logs in expos& freshwater peat underlying a salt marsh a.a........ 6 AtlanticwhHecdarmigrationroutes ................................8 Macrofossil sediment stratigraphy in glaciated cedar wetlands ..................9 Distribution of glacial moraines an& ice readvance localities in Northeastern United States ... 11 Distribution of Chamaecyparis thyoides in towns of the glaciated Northeastern United States . 12 Vegetation of the Hackensack Meadows 1819 - 1896 ....................... 17 Atlantic white cedar in the Delmarva ................................ 18 Presettlsment range of Atlantic white cedar in the Carolinas ................... 19 Location of Great Dismal Swamp National Wildlife Refuge .................... 20 Section and plan viws of a Qrollrra bay with Atlantic white cedars ...............23 Atlantic white cedar In southeastern United States ........................24 Cedar bordering a Florida sand-bottom creek .......................... 25 Morphology of Chermaecyparis thyoides .............................28 Radial annual growth curves of Atlantic white cedar ....................... 29 Water levels in six Rhoda Island cdar swamps .......................... 31 Substrate cross; section through a bog formerly dominated by Chamaecyparis thyoides .... 33 Flow diagram of cedar wetland dynamics .............................35
Recommended publications
  • Planetary Geologic Mappers Annual Meeting

    Planetary Geologic Mappers Annual Meeting

    Program Lunar and Planetary Institute 3600 Bay Area Boulevard Houston TX 77058-1113 Planetary Geologic Mappers Annual Meeting June 12–14, 2018 • Knoxville, Tennessee Institutional Support Lunar and Planetary Institute Universities Space Research Association Convener Devon Burr Earth and Planetary Sciences Department, University of Tennessee Knoxville Science Organizing Committee David Williams, Chair Arizona State University Devon Burr Earth and Planetary Sciences Department, University of Tennessee Knoxville Robert Jacobsen Earth and Planetary Sciences Department, University of Tennessee Knoxville Bradley Thomson Earth and Planetary Sciences Department, University of Tennessee Knoxville Abstracts for this meeting are available via the meeting website at https://www.hou.usra.edu/meetings/pgm2018/ Abstracts can be cited as Author A. B. and Author C. D. (2018) Title of abstract. In Planetary Geologic Mappers Annual Meeting, Abstract #XXXX. LPI Contribution No. 2066, Lunar and Planetary Institute, Houston. Guide to Sessions Tuesday, June 12, 2018 9:00 a.m. Strong Hall Meeting Room Introduction and Mercury and Venus Maps 1:00 p.m. Strong Hall Meeting Room Mars Maps 5:30 p.m. Strong Hall Poster Area Poster Session: 2018 Planetary Geologic Mappers Meeting Wednesday, June 13, 2018 8:30 a.m. Strong Hall Meeting Room GIS and Planetary Mapping Techniques and Lunar Maps 1:15 p.m. Strong Hall Meeting Room Asteroid, Dwarf Planet, and Outer Planet Satellite Maps Thursday, June 14, 2018 8:30 a.m. Strong Hall Optional Field Trip to Appalachian Mountains Program Tuesday, June 12, 2018 INTRODUCTION AND MERCURY AND VENUS MAPS 9:00 a.m. Strong Hall Meeting Room Chairs: David Williams Devon Burr 9:00 a.m.
  • Department of Planning and Zoning

    Department of Planning and Zoning

    Department of Planning and Zoning Subject: Howard County Landscape Manual Updates: Recommended Street Tree List (Appendix B) and Recommended Plant List (Appendix C) - Effective July 1, 2010 To: DLD Review Staff Homebuilders Committee From: Kent Sheubrooks, Acting Chief Division of Land Development Date: July 1, 2010 Purpose: The purpose of this policy memorandum is to update the Recommended Plant Lists presently contained in the Landscape Manual. The plant lists were created for the first edition of the Manual in 1993 before information was available about invasive qualities of certain recommended plants contained in those lists (Norway Maple, Bradford Pear, etc.). Additionally, diseases and pests have made some other plants undesirable (Ash, Austrian Pine, etc.). The Howard County General Plan 2000 and subsequent environmental and community planning publications such as the Route 1 and Route 40 Manuals and the Green Neighborhood Design Guidelines have promoted the desirability of using native plants in landscape plantings. Therefore, this policy seeks to update the Recommended Plant Lists by identifying invasive plant species and disease or pest ridden plants for their removal and prohibition from further planting in Howard County and to add other available native plants which have desirable characteristics for street tree or general landscape use for inclusion on the Recommended Plant Lists. Please note that a comprehensive review of the street tree and landscape tree lists were conducted for the purpose of this update, however, only
  • Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2016

    Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2016

    Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2016 Revised February 24, 2017 Compiled by Laura Gadd Robinson, Botanist John T. Finnegan, Information Systems Manager North Carolina Natural Heritage Program N.C. Department of Natural and Cultural Resources Raleigh, NC 27699-1651 www.ncnhp.org C ur Alleghany rit Ashe Northampton Gates C uc Surry am k Stokes P d Rockingham Caswell Person Vance Warren a e P s n Hertford e qu Chowan r Granville q ot ui a Mountains Watauga Halifax m nk an Wilkes Yadkin s Mitchell Avery Forsyth Orange Guilford Franklin Bertie Alamance Durham Nash Yancey Alexander Madison Caldwell Davie Edgecombe Washington Tyrrell Iredell Martin Dare Burke Davidson Wake McDowell Randolph Chatham Wilson Buncombe Catawba Rowan Beaufort Haywood Pitt Swain Hyde Lee Lincoln Greene Rutherford Johnston Graham Henderson Jackson Cabarrus Montgomery Harnett Cleveland Wayne Polk Gaston Stanly Cherokee Macon Transylvania Lenoir Mecklenburg Moore Clay Pamlico Hoke Union d Cumberland Jones Anson on Sampson hm Duplin ic Craven Piedmont R nd tla Onslow Carteret co S Robeson Bladen Pender Sandhills Columbus New Hanover Tidewater Coastal Plain Brunswick THE COUNTIES AND PHYSIOGRAPHIC PROVINCES OF NORTH CAROLINA Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2016 Compiled by Laura Gadd Robinson, Botanist John T. Finnegan, Information Systems Manager North Carolina Natural Heritage Program N.C. Department of Natural and Cultural Resources Raleigh, NC 27699-1651 www.ncnhp.org This list is dynamic and is revised frequently as new data become available. New species are added to the list, and others are dropped from the list as appropriate.
  • "National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary."

    "National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary."

    Intro 1996 National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands The Fish and Wildlife Service has prepared a National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary (1996 National List). The 1996 National List is a draft revision of the National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1988 National Summary (Reed 1988) (1988 National List). The 1996 National List is provided to encourage additional public review and comments on the draft regional wetland indicator assignments. The 1996 National List reflects a significant amount of new information that has become available since 1988 on the wetland affinity of vascular plants. This new information has resulted from the extensive use of the 1988 National List in the field by individuals involved in wetland and other resource inventories, wetland identification and delineation, and wetland research. Interim Regional Interagency Review Panel (Regional Panel) changes in indicator status as well as additions and deletions to the 1988 National List were documented in Regional supplements. The National List was originally developed as an appendix to the Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States (Cowardin et al.1979) to aid in the consistent application of this classification system for wetlands in the field.. The 1996 National List also was developed to aid in determining the presence of hydrophytic vegetation in the Clean Water Act Section 404 wetland regulatory program and in the implementation of the swampbuster provisions of the Food Security Act. While not required by law or regulation, the Fish and Wildlife Service is making the 1996 National List available for review and comment.
  • The Vascular Plants of Massachusetts

    The Vascular Plants of Massachusetts

    The Vascular Plants of Massachusetts: The Vascular Plants of Massachusetts: A County Checklist • First Revision Melissa Dow Cullina, Bryan Connolly, Bruce Sorrie and Paul Somers Somers Bruce Sorrie and Paul Connolly, Bryan Cullina, Melissa Dow Revision • First A County Checklist Plants of Massachusetts: Vascular The A County Checklist First Revision Melissa Dow Cullina, Bryan Connolly, Bruce Sorrie and Paul Somers Massachusetts Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program The Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program (NHESP), part of the Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife, is one of the programs forming the Natural Heritage network. NHESP is responsible for the conservation and protection of hundreds of species that are not hunted, fished, trapped, or commercially harvested in the state. The Program's highest priority is protecting the 176 species of vertebrate and invertebrate animals and 259 species of native plants that are officially listed as Endangered, Threatened or of Special Concern in Massachusetts. Endangered species conservation in Massachusetts depends on you! A major source of funding for the protection of rare and endangered species comes from voluntary donations on state income tax forms. Contributions go to the Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Fund, which provides a portion of the operating budget for the Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program. NHESP protects rare species through biological inventory,
  • Native Trees of Georgia

    Native Trees of Georgia

    1 NATIVE TREES OF GEORGIA By G. Norman Bishop Professor of Forestry George Foster Peabody School of Forestry University of Georgia Currently Named Daniel B. Warnell School of Forest Resources University of Georgia GEORGIA FORESTRY COMMISSION Eleventh Printing - 2001 Revised Edition 2 FOREWARD This manual has been prepared in an effort to give to those interested in the trees of Georgia a means by which they may gain a more intimate knowledge of the tree species. Of about 250 species native to the state, only 92 are described here. These were chosen for their commercial importance, distribution over the state or because of some unusual characteristic. Since the manual is intended primarily for the use of the layman, technical terms have been omitted wherever possible; however, the scientific names of the trees and the families to which they belong, have been included. It might be explained that the species are grouped by families, the name of each occurring at the top of the page over the name of the first member of that family. Also, there is included in the text, a subdivision entitled KEY CHARACTERISTICS, the purpose of which is to give the reader, all in one group, the most outstanding features whereby he may more easily recognize the tree. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The author wishes to express his appreciation to the Houghton Mifflin Company, publishers of Sargent’s Manual of the Trees of North America, for permission to use the cuts of all trees appearing in this manual; to B. R. Stogsdill for assistance in arranging the material; to W.
  • On the Horton-Strahler Number for Random Tries Informatique Théorique Et Applications, Tome 30, No 5 (1996), P

    On the Horton-Strahler Number for Random Tries Informatique Théorique Et Applications, Tome 30, No 5 (1996), P

    INFORMATIQUE THÉORIQUE ET APPLICATIONS L. DEVROYE P. KRUSZEWSKI On the Horton-Strahler number for random tries Informatique théorique et applications, tome 30, no 5 (1996), p. 443-456 <http://www.numdam.org/item?id=ITA_1996__30_5_443_0> © AFCET, 1996, tous droits réservés. L’accès aux archives de la revue « Informatique théorique et applications » im- plique l’accord avec les conditions générales d’utilisation (http://www.numdam. org/conditions). Toute utilisation commerciale ou impression systématique est constitutive d’une infraction pénale. Toute copie ou impression de ce fichier doit contenir la présente mention de copyright. Article numérisé dans le cadre du programme Numérisation de documents anciens mathématiques http://www.numdam.org/ Informatique théorique et Applications/Theoretical Informaties and Applications (vol. 30, n° 5, 1996, pp. 443-456) ON THE HORTON-STRAHLER NUMBER FOR RANDOM TRIES (*) by L. DEVROYE (*) and P. KRUSZEWSKI (2) Communicated by A. ARNOLD Abstract. - We consider random tries constructedfrom n i.i.d. séquences of independent Bernoulli (p) random variables, 0 < p < 1. We study the Horton-Strahler number Hn, and show that l0ëmin(p,l-p) in probability as n —*• oo. Keywords: Horton-Strahler number, trie, probabilistic analysis, data structures, random trees. Résumé. - On étudie des arbres aléatoires du type « trie » construits à partir de n suites indépendantes de variables aléatoires Bernoulli (p) où 0 < p < 1. On prouve que Hn 1 en probabilité, où Hn est le nombre de Horton-Strahler. INTRODUCTION In 1960, Fredkin [9] coined the term trie for an efficient data structure to store and vetrieve strings. These were further developed and modified by Knuth [4], Larson [16], Fagin, Nievergelt, Pippenger and Strong [6], Litwin [17], Aho, Hopcroft and Ullman [1] and others.
  • Natural Landscapes of Maine a Guide to Natural Communities and Ecosystems

    Natural Landscapes of Maine a Guide to Natural Communities and Ecosystems

    Natural Landscapes of Maine A Guide to Natural Communities and Ecosystems by Susan Gawler and Andrew Cutko Natural Landscapes of Maine A Guide to Natural Communities and Ecosystems by Susan Gawler and Andrew Cutko Copyright © 2010 by the Maine Natural Areas Program, Maine Department of Conservation 93 State House Station, Augusta, Maine 04333-0093 All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system without written permission from the authors or the Maine Natural Areas Program, except for inclusion of brief quotations in a review. Illustrations and photographs are used with permission and are copyright by the contributors. Images cannot be reproduced without expressed written consent of the contributor. ISBN 0-615-34739-4 To cite this document: Gawler, S. and A. Cutko. 2010. Natural Landscapes of Maine: A Guide to Natural Communities and Ecosystems. Maine Natural Areas Program, Maine Department of Conservation, Augusta, Maine. Cover photo: Circumneutral Riverside Seep on the St. John River, Maine Printed and bound in Maine using recycled, chlorine-free paper Contents Page Acknowledgements ..................................................................................... 3 Foreword ..................................................................................................... 4 Introduction ...............................................................................................
  • Chamaecyparis Thyoides)

    Chamaecyparis Thyoides)

    Disease Resistance and Aesthetic Evaluation of Atlantic White Cedar (Chamaecyparis thyoides) David R. Sandrock, Michael A. Dirr and Jean Williams-Woodward Horticulture and Plant Pathology - Athens, UGA Since the original cross in 1888, Leyland cypress (xCupressocyparis leylandii) has been planted worldwide. Its rapid upright growth and evergreen foliage make it a popular choice among consumers for windbreaks, hedges, screens, specimens and Christmas trees. However, Leyland cypress is susceptible to at least two fungal pathogens, Seiridium and Botryosphaeria. These pathogens cause canker development which leads to the death of branches and eventually kills the plant. This it is necessary to search for an alternative needle evergreen with similar aesthetic characteristics but greater disease resistance. A possible plant for this role is Atlantic white cedar (Chamaecyparis thyoides). My research consists of two objectives. The first is to screen Atlantic white cedar clones for resistance to Seiridium and Botryosphaeria. The second objective is to select superior taxa of Atlantic white cedar for production based on disease resistance, aesthetic characteristics, growth habits and performance in both field and nursery conditions. The disease screening experiment was initialed in the Fall of 1998. Seiridium, Botryodiplodia and Fusicoccum were isolated from infected branches of Leyland cypress and grown in pure culture. Plants for testing were vegetatively propagated during Fall, 1997. The disease resistance screening experiment consisted of 4 completely randomized blocks of 60 one- gallon plants. Each block contained 10 single-plant replications of 5 clones of Atlantic white cedar and one Leyland cypress. Plants were wounded with a wood rasp at a point on the stem measuring approximately 1 cm in diameter.
  • Cocoa Beach Maritime Hammock Preserve Management Plan

    Cocoa Beach Maritime Hammock Preserve Management Plan

    MANAGEMENT PLAN Cocoa Beach’s Maritime Hammock Preserve City of Cocoa Beach, Florida Florida Communities Trust Project No. 03 – 035 –FF3 Adopted March 18, 2004 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE I. Introduction ……………………………………………………………. 1 II. Purpose …………………………………………………………….……. 2 a. Future Uses ………….………………………………….…….…… 2 b. Management Objectives ………………………………………….... 2 c. Major Comprehensive Plan Directives ………………………..….... 2 III. Site Development and Improvement ………………………………… 3 a. Existing Physical Improvements ……….…………………………. 3 b. Proposed Physical Improvements…………………………………… 3 c. Wetland Buffer ………...………….………………………………… 4 d. Acknowledgment Sign …………………………………..………… 4 e. Parking ………………………….………………………………… 5 f. Stormwater Facilities …………….………………………………… 5 g. Hazard Mitigation ………………………………………………… 5 h. Permits ………………………….………………………………… 5 i. Easements, Concessions, and Leases …………………………..… 5 IV. Natural Resources ……………………………………………..……… 6 a. Natural Communities ………………………..……………………. 6 b. Listed Animal Species ………………………….…………….……. 7 c. Listed Plant Species …………………………..…………………... 8 d. Inventory of the Natural Communities ………………..………….... 10 e. Water Quality …………..………………………….…..…………... 10 f. Unique Geological Features ………………………………………. 10 g. Trail Network ………………………………….…..………..……... 10 h. Greenways ………………………………….…..……………..……. 11 i Adopted March 18, 2004 V. Resources Enhancement …………………………..…………………… 11 a. Upland Restoration ………………………..………………………. 11 b. Wetland Restoration ………………………….…………….………. 13 c. Invasive Exotic Plants …………………………..…………………... 13 d. Feral
  • Morphology and Morphogenesis of the Seed Cones of the Cupressaceae - Part II Cupressoideae

    Morphology and Morphogenesis of the Seed Cones of the Cupressaceae - Part II Cupressoideae

    1 2 Bull. CCP 4 (2): 51-78. (10.2015) A. Jagel & V.M. Dörken Morphology and morphogenesis of the seed cones of the Cupressaceae - part II Cupressoideae Summary The cone morphology of the Cupressoideae genera Calocedrus, Thuja, Thujopsis, Chamaecyparis, Fokienia, Platycladus, Microbiota, Tetraclinis, Cupressus and Juniperus are presented in young stages, at pollination time as well as at maturity. Typical cone diagrams were drawn for each genus. In contrast to the taxodiaceous Cupressaceae, in Cupressoideae outgrowths of the seed-scale do not exist; the seed scale is completely reduced to the ovules, inserted in the axil of the cone scale. The cone scale represents the bract scale and is not a bract- /seed scale complex as is often postulated. Especially within the strongly derived groups of the Cupressoideae an increased number of ovules and the appearance of more than one row of ovules occurs. The ovules in a row develop centripetally. Each row represents one of ascending accessory shoots. Within a cone the ovules develop from proximal to distal. Within the Cupressoideae a distinct tendency can be observed shifting the fertile zone in distal parts of the cone by reducing sterile elements. In some of the most derived taxa the ovules are no longer (only) inserted axillary, but (additionally) terminal at the end of the cone axis or they alternate to the terminal cone scales (Microbiota, Tetraclinis, Juniperus). Such non-axillary ovules could be regarded as derived from axillary ones (Microbiota) or they develop directly from the apical meristem and represent elements of a terminal short-shoot (Tetraclinis, Juniperus).
  • Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia, and Georgia, Working Draft of 17 March 2004 -- ERICACEAE

    Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia, and Georgia, Working Draft of 17 March 2004 -- ERICACEAE

    Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia, and Georgia, Working Draft of 17 March 2004 -- ERICACEAE ERICACEAE (Heath Family) A family of about 107 genera and 3400 species, primarily shrubs, small trees, and subshrubs, nearly cosmopolitan. The Ericaceae is very important in our area, with a great diversity of genera and species, many of them rather narrowly endemic. Our area is one of the north temperate centers of diversity for the Ericaceae. Along with Quercus and Pinus, various members of this family are dominant in much of our landscape. References: Kron et al. (2002); Wood (1961); Judd & Kron (1993); Kron & Chase (1993); Luteyn et al. (1996)=L; Dorr & Barrie (1993); Cullings & Hileman (1997). Main Key, for use with flowering or fruiting material 1 Plant an herb, subshrub, or sprawling shrub, not clonal by underground rhizomes (except Gaultheria procumbens and Epigaea repens), rarely more than 3 dm tall; plants mycotrophic or hemi-mycotrophic (except Epigaea, Gaultheria, and Arctostaphylos). 2 Plants without chlorophyll (fully mycotrophic); stems fleshy; leaves represented by bract-like scales, white or variously colored, but not green; pollen grains single; [subfamily Monotropoideae; section Monotropeae]. 3 Petals united; fruit nodding, a berry; flower and fruit several per stem . Monotropsis 3 Petals separate; fruit erect, a capsule; flower and fruit 1-several per stem. 4 Flowers few to many, racemose; stem pubescent, at least in the inflorescence; plant yellow, orange, or red when fresh, aging or drying dark brown ...............................................Hypopitys 4 Flower solitary; stem glabrous; plant white (rarely pink) when fresh, aging or drying black . Monotropa 2 Plants with chlorophyll (hemi-mycotrophic or autotrophic); stems woody; leaves present and well-developed, green; pollen grains in tetrads (single in Orthilia).