FLORISTIC INVENTORY OF THE COOPER WOODS— SKINNER WOODS COMPLEX AND A COMPARISON OF THE WOODLAND STRUCTURE AND COMPOSITION BETWEEN THE TWO SITES A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE MASTER OF SCIENCE BY AHMED HUBINI DR. DON RUCH – ADVISOR BALL STATE UNIVERSITY MUNCIE, INDIANA MAY 2017 i ABSTRACT THESIS: Floristic Inventory of the Cooper Woods—Skinner Woods Complex and a Comparison of the Woodland Structure and Composition between the Two Sites STUDENT: Ahmed Hubini DEGREE: Master of Science COLLEGE: Sciences and Humanities DATE: May 2017 PAGES: 90 Both Cooper woods (CW) and Skinner Woods (SW) are owned and managed by Ball State University and are located in Muncie IN, Delaware County. The two sites are approximately 18.8 hectares. Floristic quality analysis: For the two woodlands combined, 356 taxa representing 225 genera in 90 families were reported. The four families with the highest number of species were Poaceae (45), Asteraceae (38), Cyperaceae (28), and Rosaceae (20). Of the 356 documented species, 276 were native and 80 were exotic. A physiognomic analysis was provided. The FQI and mean C were 55.0 and 3.4, respectively, and the FQI and mean C for total species (native and exotic) were 48.6 and 2.6, respectively. The FQI and mean C indicated that the complex is of nature preserve quality, but the decreased in the value for the mean C suggests that the exotics are having a negative impact on the native flora. No species occur on the Indiana Department of Natural Resources list of endangered, threatened or rare plants, but two species, Rudbeckia fulgida var. fulgida and Spiranthes ovalis var. erostellata, are on the state watch list. Similar results were obtained for CW and SW individually. Woody plant analysis: Twenty-four 15 m plots were established in SW; plot centers were 30 m apart. Data collected at each plot included species name, distance from the plot center in m, azimuth, diameter at breast height ii (dbh), and tree health. Trees were placed in three size classes (dbh > 20 cm, dbh > 10 cm but ≤ 20 cm, and dbh > 5 cm but ≤ 10 cm. Results indicate that prior to the introduction of the emerald ash borer, SW was a Midland hardwood forest dominated by ash, oak, and hickory, but following its introduction, the ash are nearly gone. Similar results were found in CW (data provided by Dr. Kem Badger). Currently, the RIV for all species of Carya and Quercus combined was nearly identical for both sites, i.e., 72 for SW versus 69 for CW. However, Carya spp. had a higher RIV at SW (29) then at CW (17). Analysis of the two smaller size classes suggests that the forest will change composition over time from the current oak-hickory dominated woodland to a sugar maple-hickory dominated forest. iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to express my sincere appreciation and gratitude to my advisor Dr. Don Ruch for his patience, motivation, knowledge, and guidance that has helped me during my studies and my writing. I would also like to give a special thanks to John Taylor and Megan Crecelius for all their help and support in the field. I would like to thank my committee members, Dr. Kem Badger and Dr. David LeBlanc, for their encouragement, insightful comments, and patience. I would especially like to thank my family: my parents, my brothers and sisters, for supporting me throughout my life. Last but not the least, I am thankful to all my friends for their kind supports. Ahmed Hubini March 30, 2017 iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract ............................................................................................................................... ii Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................ iv Introduction ..........................................................................................................................1 Site Description ....................................................................................................................2 The study site ..........................................................................................................2 Site characteristics ...................................................................................................4 History of the Site ................................................................................................................5 The Cooper Property ................................................................................................5 The Skinner Field Area ............................................................................................5 Materials and Methods .........................................................................................................6 Floristic quality study ..............................................................................................6 Woody plant analysis ...............................................................................................8 Results ..................................................................................................................................9 Floristic quality of Cooper Woods and Skinner Woods combined .........................9 Floristic quality Cooper Woods .............................................................................10 Floristic quality Skinner Woods ............................................................................11 Woody structure and composition of Skinner Woods ...........................................16 Discussion ..........................................................................................................................22 Inventory and floristic quality index ......................................................................22 Woody structure and composition of Skinner Woods ...........................................24 Woody structure and composition of Cooper Woods ............................................25 Comparison of Cooper and Skinner Woods ..........................................................26 Conclusion .........................................................................................................................35 v Appendix 1: Catalog of Vascular Flora .............................................................................36 Appendix 2: Background Information for Tree Analysis ..................................................66 Appendix 3: Stand Table of Raw Data ..............................................................................68 Literature Cited ..................................................................................................................77 vi List of Tables 1. Physiognomic analysis of the vascular flora documented in Cooper Woods and Skinner Woods combined ........................................................................................................12 2. Floristic quality matrices Cooper Woods & Skinner Woods.........................................13 3. Physiognomic analysis of the vascular flora documented in Cooper Woods ...............14 4. Physiognomic analysis of the vascular flora documented in Skinner Woods ...............15 5. Stand table for all trees with a dbh ≥ 20 cm, Skinner Woods ........................................19 6. Stand table for all trees without Fraxinus spp. with a dbh ≥ 20 cm, Skinner Woods ...20 7. Stand table for trees with a dbh < 20 cm and ≥ 5 cm, Skinner Woods ..........................21 8. Stand table for all living trees with a dbh ≥ 20 cm, Cooper Woods ..............................28 9. Sub-Set Chi-Square Analysis .........................................................................................29 vii List of Figures 1. Map of Indiana showing the location of Delaware County (left), and within the city of Muncie the location of Cooper Woods and Skinner Woods ......................................30 2. An aerial overview of the Cooper Woods-Skinner Woods complex with emphasis on vegetational communities ...........................................................................................31 3. Map illustrating the distribution of soil types at the Cooper–Skinner Woodland Area .32 4. Skinner Woods permanent plots ....................................................................................33 5. Comparison of Skinner Woods permanent plots and Cooper Woods permanent plots .34 viii INTRODUCTION Located in central Delaware County, Indiana, the Cooper-Skinner Area is owned by Ball State University and managed by the Ball State University Field Station and Environmental Education Center (FSEEC). FSEEC documents describe the site as follows: “The Cooper- Skinner Area is comprised of many distinct microenvironments with each habitat rich in diversity for field research and environmental education purposes. History, habitat, and land use of the Cooper Field Area mirror the diverse habitats located in east-central Indiana. Some of the areas have undergone restoration, such as prairie, wetlands, and forests, while others are left to develop naturally. The site is managed to provide on environmental laboratory for environmental education. To date, the major theme of environmental education programs and restoration efforts has been the enhancement of the regional biodiversity of a human-dominated landscape. Located within the Area (Cooper-Skinner) are permanent monitoring stations, including a weather station, vegetation plots, and quality water sensors.” (John Taylor, Land Manager of