NatureServe Explorer logo.An Online Encyclopedia of Life
Search
Ecological Association Comprehensive Report: Record 1 of 1 selected.
See All Search Results    View Glossary
<< Previous | Next >>

Quercus rubra / (Kalmia latifolia, Rhododendron catawbiense, Rhododendron maximum) / Galax urceolata Forest
Translated Name: Northern Red Oak / (Mountain Laurel, Catawba Rosebay, Great Laurel) / Beetleweed Forest
Common Name: Southern Appalachian High-Elevation Red Oak Forest (Evergreen Shrub Type)
Unique Identifier: CEGL007299
Classification Approach: International Vegetation Classification (IVC)
Summary: This community occurs on most of the major mountain ranges of the Southern Appalachians at elevations of 1070-1646 m (3500-5400 feet) on ridges and mid to upper slopes, commonly with southern and southeastern exposures. Outliers occur in the southern part of the Central Appalachians, on the highest ridges of the Ridge and Valley and Blue Ridge in southwest Virginia. This montane community includes forest vegetation with Quercus rubra making up at least 75% of the tree canopy and with greater than 20% shrub cover, which may be continuous to patchy. More than 50% of the total shrub cover is evergreen, although deciduous shrubs may be present. Typical shrub dominants include Kalmia latifolia, Rhododendron catawbiense, and Rhododendron maximum. The herbaceous stratum is not diverse and is typically very sparse with scattered forbs and woody seedlings, including Galax urceolata, Solidago curtisii (= Solidago caesia var. curtisii), Epigaea repens, Dennstaedtia punctilobula, Conopholis americana, Thelypteris noveboracensis, Clintonia umbellulata, Eurybia divaricata (= Aster divaricatus), and Dioscorea villosa. On exposed sites this community commonly contains acidic rock outcrop communities and montane shrublands as inclusions, and may grade into forests dominated by Tsuga caroliniana, Pinus rigida, Pinus pungens, and Quercus prinus. At higher elevations, this forest often occurs adjacent to, or grades into, forests dominated by Picea rubens, Abies fraseri, or northern hardwood species (Aesculus flava, Betula alleghaniensis, Fagus grandifolia, ).



Classification

Classification Confidence: High
Classification Comments: This community includes forest vegetation with Quercus rubra making up at least 75% of the tree canopy and with greater than 20% shrub cover. More than 50% of the total shrub cover is evergreen, although deciduous shrubs may be present. Typical evergreen shrub species in this community include Kalmia latifolia, Rhododendron catawbiense, and Rhododendron maximum. The most constant species (>60%) in 13 plots classified as this association from North Carolina, Tennessee and Virginia, in order of descending constancy, are Quercus rubra, Kalmia latifolia, Rhododendron maximum, Acer rubrum, Ilex montana, Galax urceolata, Castanea dentata, Tsuga canadensis, Rhododendron calendulaceum, and Prunus serotina var. serotina (Fleming and Patterson 2009a).

Two varieties of Quercus rubra occur within the range of this community, Quercus rubra var. ambigua and Quercus rubra var. rubra (Kartesz 1999). Although the two varieties are known to occur together (Rohrer 1983), Quercus rubra var. ambigua occurs mostly at elevations greater than 1000 m (3300 feet), while Quercus rubra var. rubra occurs at elevations less than 1000 m (3300 feet) (Weakley 1997). The two varieties are based upon morphological differences in the leaves and acorns (Fernald 1950, Coker and Totten 1945); however, studies of foliar flavonoid composition in different Quercus rubra populations suggest that varietal distinction may not be warranted (McDougal and Parks 1984). Even though most studies of Quercus rubra-dominated vegetation do not distinguish Quercus rubra at the varietal level, it is likely, given the elevation range of this community, that the dominant species in this forest is Quercus rubra var. ambigua.

Similar Quercus rubra-dominated forests occur in the southern Appalachian Mountains. Forests with less than 75% Quercus rubra in the canopy are classified in other forest alliances. In Georgia this type occurs on the north side of Rabun Bald, where it grades into Quercus rubra / Rhododendron catawbiense - Rhododendron arborescens Woodland (CEGL004503) in more extreme areas.


Vegetation Hierarchy
Class 1 - Forest & Woodland
Subclass 1.B - Temperate & Boreal Forest & Woodland
Formation 1.B.2 - Cool Temperate Forest & Woodland
Division 1.B.2.Na - Eastern North American Forest & Woodland
Macrogroup Appalachian-Northeastern Oak - Hardwood - Pine Forest & Woodland
Group Appalachian Oak / Chestnut Forest
Alliance Montane Oak Forest

This is the revised vegetation hierarchy. For more information see Classification Sources and usnvc.org.

Similar Associations
Unique Identifier Name
CEGL004503 Quercus rubra / Rhododendron catawbiense - Rhododendron arborescens Woodland
CEGL006286 Quercus prinus - Quercus rubra / Rhododendron maximum / Galax urceolata Forest
CEGL007295 Quercus alba / Kalmia latifolia Forest
CEGL007298 Quercus rubra / Carex pensylvanica - Ageratina altissima var. roanensis Forest
CEGL007300 Quercus rubra / (Vaccinium simulatum, Rhododendron calendulaceum) / (Dennstaedtia punctilobula, Thelypteris noveboracensis) Forest



Related Concepts from Other Classifications

Related Subnational Community Units
These data are subject to substantial ongoing revision and may be out of date for some states.
In the U.S., contact the state Heritage Program for the most complete and up-to-date information at: http://www.natureserve.org/natureserve-network.
Information from programs in other jurisdictions will be posted when they are made available.
Subnation Concept Name Relationship to Standard Confidence Reference
North Carolina High Elevation Red Oak Forest (Heath Subtype) Equivalent Certain Schafale 2012


Other Related Concepts
Related Concept Name: Kalmia latifolia Phase
Relationship: ? - Undetermined
Reference: DeLapp, J. A. 1978. Gradient analysis and classification of the high elevation red oak community of the Southern Appalachians. M.S. thesis, North Carolina State University, Raleigh. 483 pp.
Related Concept Name: Quercus rubra / Rhododendron catawbiense Forest
Relationship: = - Equivalent
Reference: Fleming, G. P., and K. D. Patterson. 2009a. A vegetation classification for the Appalachian Trail: Virginia south to Georgia. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage. In-house analysis, March 2009.
Related Concept Name: Quercus rubra / Rhododendron maximum Forest
Relationship: = - Equivalent
Reference: Patterson, K. D. 1994. Classification of vegetation in Ellicott Rock Wilderness, Southeastern Blue Ridge Escarpment. M.S. thesis, North Carolina State University, Raleigh. 91 pp.
Related Concept Name: Rhododendron catawbiense Phase
Relationship: ? - Undetermined
Reference: DeLapp, J. A. 1978. Gradient analysis and classification of the high elevation red oak community of the Southern Appalachians. M.S. thesis, North Carolina State University, Raleigh. 483 pp.
Related Concept Name: Rhododendron maximum Phase
Relationship: ? - Undetermined
Reference: DeLapp, J. A. 1978. Gradient analysis and classification of the high elevation red oak community of the Southern Appalachians. M.S. thesis, North Carolina State University, Raleigh. 483 pp.
Related Concept Name: High Elevation Red Oak Forest
Relationship: B - Broader
Reference: Schafale, M. P., and A. S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the natural communities of North Carolina. Third approximation. North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, Division of Parks and Recreation, Natural Heritage Program, Raleigh. 325 pp.
Related Concept Name: High Elevation Red Oak Forest (Heath Subtype)
Relationship: = - Equivalent
Reference: Schafale, M. 1998b. Fourth approximation guide. High mountain communities. March 1998 draft. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Raleigh.
Related Concept Name: High elevation red oak /mt. laurel-great laurel forest
Relationship: ? - Undetermined
Reference: CAP [Central Appalachian Forest Working Group]. 1998. Central Appalachian Working group discussions. The Nature Conservancy, Boston, MA.
Related Concept Name: IA4g. High Elevation Northern Red Oak Forest
Relationship: B - Broader
Reference: Allard, D. J. 1990. Southeastern United States ecological community classification. Interim report, Version 1.2. The Nature Conservancy, Southeast Regional Office, Chapel Hill, NC. 96 pp.
Related Concept Name: Northern Red Oak (55)
Relationship: ? - Undetermined
Reference: USFS [U.S. Forest Service]. 1988. Silvicultural examination and prescription field book. USDA Forest Service, Southern Region. Atlanta, GA. 35 pp.
Related Concept Name: Northern Red Oak Forest
Relationship: B - Broader
Reference: Fleming, G. P., P. P. Coulling, D. P. Walton, K. M. McCoy, and M. R. Parrish. 2001. The natural communities of Virginia: Classification of ecological community groups. First approximation. Natural Heritage Technical Report 01-1. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond, VA. 76 pp.
Related Concept Name: Northern Red Oak, BR
Relationship: B - Broader
Reference: Pyne, M. 1994. Tennessee natural communities. Unpublished document. Tennessee Department of Conservation, Ecology Service Division, Nashville. 7 pp.
Related Concept Name: Northern Red Oak: 55
Relationship: B - Broader
Reference: Eyre, F. H., editor. 1980. Forest cover types of the United States and Canada. Society of American Foresters, Washington, DC. 148 pp.
Related Concept Name: Red Oak - Chestnut Forest
Relationship: B - Broader
Reference: Whittaker, R. H. 1956. Vegetation of the Great Smoky Mountains. Ecological Monographs 26:1-80.
Related Concept Name: Submesic Oak Ridge Forest
Relationship: B - Broader
Reference: Ambrose, J. 1990a. Georgia's natural communities--A preliminary list. Unpublished document. Georgia Natural Heritage Inventory. 5 pp.

Ecological Systems Placement

Ecological Systems Placement
Ecological System Unique ID Ecological System Name
CES202.596 Central and Southern Appalachian Montane Oak Forest


NatureServe Conservation Status
Global Status: G4 (04Jan2000)
Rounded Global Status: G4 - Apparently Secure
Reasons: This community is uncommon but not rare. It is secure within its range.

Distribution
Color legend for Distribution Map
United States Distribution: GA, NC, SCpotentially occurs, TN, VA
Global Distribution: United States
Global Range: This community occurs on most of the major mountain ranges of the Southern Appalachians in North Carolina, Tennessee, Georgia, and Virginia. This community could possibly range into South Carolina.

U.S. Forest Service Ecoregions
Domain Name: Humid Temperate Domain
Division Name: Hot Continental Regime Mountains
Province Name: Central Appalachian Broadleaf Forest - Coniferous Forest - Meadow Province
Province Code: M221 Occurrence Status: Confident or certain
Section Name: Northern Ridge and Valley Section
Section Code: M221A Occurrence Status: Confident or certain
Section Name: Cumberland Mountains Section
Section Code: M221C Occurrence Status: Confident or certain
Section Name: Blue Ridge Mountains Section
Section Code: M221D Occurrence Status: Confident or certain


Vegetation

Vegetation Summary: Stands of this montane community of the Southern Appalachians are dominated by Quercus rubra which makes up at least 75% of the tree canopy. Stands typically have greater than 20% shrub cover, which may be continuous to patchy. More than 50% of the total shrub cover is evergreen, although deciduous shrubs may be present. Typical shrub dominants include Kalmia latifolia, Rhododendron catawbiense, and Rhododendron maximum. The herbaceous stratum is not diverse and is typically very sparse with scattered forbs and woody seedlings, including Galax urceolata, Solidago curtisii (= Solidago caesia var. curtisii), Epigaea repens, Dennstaedtia punctilobula, Conopholis americana, Thelypteris noveboracensis, Clintonia umbellulata, Eurybia divaricata (= Aster divaricatus), and Dioscorea villosa. Many species in this community are endemic to the Southern Blue Ridge or have the bulk of their worldwide range in that region. Some of these endemic species include Abies fraseri, Aesculus flava, Ageratina altissima var. roanensis, Euphorbia purpurea, Leucothoe recurva, Prenanthes roanensis, Rhododendron catawbiense, Rhododendron vaseyi, Silene ovata, and Solidago curtisii.

Vegetation Composition (incomplete)
Species Name Rounded Global Status Growth Form Stratum Charact-
eristic
Dominant Constant
Cover Class %
Con-
stancy
%
Prunus virginiana G4 Broad-leaved deciduous tree Tree canopy      
 
 
Quercus rubra G4 Broad-leaved deciduous tree Tree canopy  
 
 
Abies fraseri G4 Needle-leaved tree Tree canopy      
 
 
Tsuga caroliniana G4 Needle-leaved tree Tree canopy      
 
 
Acer rubrum G4 Broad-leaved deciduous tree Tree subcanopy  
 
 
Hamamelis virginiana G4 Broad-leaved deciduous tree Tree subcanopy  
 
 
Aesculus flava G4 Broad-leaved deciduous tree Shrub/sapling (tall & short)      
 
 
Ilex montana G4 Broad-leaved deciduous tree Shrub/sapling (tall & short)    
 
 
Clethra acuminata G4 Broad-leaved deciduous shrub Shrub/sapling (tall & short)      
 
 
Rhododendron prinophyllum G4 Broad-leaved deciduous shrub Shrub/sapling (tall & short)      
 
 
Rhododendron vaseyi G4 Broad-leaved deciduous shrub Shrub/sapling (tall & short)      
 
 
Vaccinium erythrocarpum G4 Broad-leaved deciduous shrub Shrub/sapling (tall & short)      
 
 
Vaccinium hirsutum G4 Broad-leaved deciduous shrub Shrub/sapling (tall & short)      
 
 
Leucothoe recurva G4 Broad-leaved evergreen shrub Shrub/sapling (tall & short)      
 
 
Rhododendron catawbiense G4 Broad-leaved evergreen tree Tall shrub/sapling  
 
 
Rhododendron maximum G4 Broad-leaved evergreen tree Tall shrub/sapling  
 
 
Kalmia latifolia G4 Broad-leaved evergreen shrub Tall shrub/sapling  
 
 
Hypericum buckleii G4 Dwarf-shrub Short shrub/sapling      
 
 
Pyrola americana G4 Dwarf-shrub Short shrub/sapling      
 
 
Ageratina altissima var. roanensis G4 Flowering forb Herb (field)      
 
 
Calystegia catesbeiana G4 Flowering forb Herb (field)      
 
 
Euphorbia purpurea G4 Flowering forb Herb (field)      
 
 
Galax urceolata G4 Flowering forb Herb (field)  
 
 
Helianthemum bicknellii G4 Flowering forb Herb (field)      
 
 
Helianthemum propinquum G4 Flowering forb Herb (field)      
 
 
Krigia montana G4 Flowering forb Herb (field)      
 
 
Prenanthes roanensis G4 Flowering forb Herb (field)      
 
 
Silene ovata G4 Flowering forb Herb (field)      
 
 
Solidago curtisii G4 Flowering forb Herb (field)      
 
 
Streptopus lanceolatus var. roseus G4 Flowering forb Herb (field)      
 
 
Botrychium lanceolatum var. angustisegmentum G4 Fern (Spore-bearing forb) Herb (field)      
 
 
Calamagrostis porteri G4 Graminoid Herb (field)      
 
 
Carex roanensis G4 Graminoid Herb (field)      
 
 
Clematis occidentalis G4 Liana Herb (field)      
 
 
Lonicera dioica G4 Liana Herb (field)      
 
 


At-Risk Species Reported for this Association
Scientific Name
  (Common Name)
NatureServe Global Status U.S. Endangered Species Act Status
Abies fraseri
  (Fraser Fir)
G2  
Ageratina altissima var. roanensis
  (Appalachian White Snakeroot)
G5T3T4  
Calystegia catesbeiana
  (Catesby's False Bindweed)
G3  
Carex roanensis
  (Roan Mountain Sedge)
G2G3  
Euphorbia purpurea
  (Glade Spurge)
G3  
Hypericum buckleii
  (Blue Ridge St. John's-wort)
G3  
Krigia montana
  (False Dandelion)
G3  
Prenanthes roanensis
  (Roan Mountain Rattlesnake-root)
G3  
Rhododendron vaseyi
  (Pink-shell Azalea)
G3  
Silene ovata
  (Ovate Catchfly)
G3  
Tsuga caroliniana
  (Carolina Hemlock)
G3  
Vaccinium hirsutum
  (Hairy Blueberry)
G3  

Vegetation Structure
Stratum Growth Form
Height of Stratum (m)
Cover
Class
%
Min
Cover %
Max
Cover %
Tree canopy Other/unknown
 
 
 
 
Tree subcanopy Other/unknown
 
 
 
 
Tall shrub/sapling Shrub
2 - 5 m
 
 
 
Herb (field) Flowering forb
 
 
 
 


Environmental Setting

Wetland Indicator: N
Environmental Summary: This community occurs on most of the major mountain ranges of the Southern Appalachians at elevations of 1070-1646 m (3500-5400 feet) on ridges and mid- to upper-slope positions, commonly with south and southeast exposures. Outliers occur in the southern part of the Central Appalachians, on the highest ridges of the Ridge and Valley and Blue Ridge in southwest Virginia. DeLapp (1978) found that this community type occurs on most slope aspects but was most commonly found on southeast and south exposures. Of the 13 plot samples from the Appalachian Trail classification project, 60% were on crests and interfluves; the remaining samples had variable slope exposures (Fleming and Patterson 2009a). This community occurs over well-drained soils underlain by Precambrian gneisses, schists and granites. These soils are classified as Typic, Umbric, or Lithic Dystrochrepts, and Typic Haplumbrepts (Golden 1974). Soils supporting this forest with a mainly evergreen shrub understory are slightly more acidic than Quercus rubra-dominated forests with deciduous shrub understories (DeLapp 1978).


Dynamic Processes

Dynamics: The canopy is probably rarely removed completely by natural disturbance; however, small canopy gaps are caused by individual tree death. Occurrences of this community on exposed slopes and south- and west-facing ridges are subject to lightning-caused fires and damage by ice and wind. Damage by icestorms is probably the most common form of natural disturbance. Quercus rubra reproduction and survival are optimal in canopy gaps with little regeneration under the forest canopy, hence these forests will eventually succeed to forests with mixed canopy composition of Quercus rubra, Betula alleghaniensis, Acer rubrum, and Fagus grandifolia. Many Quercus rubra-dominated stands of today were, prior to the chestnut blight in the 1930s, dominated or codominated by Castanea dentata with scattered Quercus rubra and Acer rubrum in the canopy (Golden 1974). The fungus Endothia parasitica eliminated Castanea dentata in the upper canopy, subsequently releasing the subcanopy Quercus rubra, which eventually resulted in a nearly pure upper canopy of large Quercus rubra.


Plot Sampling & Classification Analysis

Plots stored in VegBank


Authors/Contributors
Concept Author(s): K.D. Patterson
Element Description Edition Date: 24Feb2010
Element Description Author(s): K.D. Patterson
NatureServe Conservation Status Factors Edition Date: 04Jan2000
NatureServe Conservation Status Factors Author(s): K.D. Patterson

Ecological data developed by NatureServe and its network of natural heritage programs (see Local Programs) and other contributors and cooperators (see Sources).


References
  • Allard, D. J. 1990. Southeastern United States ecological community classification. Interim report, Version 1.2. The Nature Conservancy, Southeast Regional Office, Chapel Hill, NC. 96 pp.

  • Ambrose, J. 1990a. Georgia's natural communities--A preliminary list. Unpublished document. Georgia Natural Heritage Inventory. 5 pp.

  • CAP [Central Appalachian Forest Working Group]. 1998. Central Appalachian Working group discussions. The Nature Conservancy, Boston, MA.

  • Coker, W. C., and H. R. Totten. 1945. Trees of the southeastern United States. University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill.

  • DeLapp, J. A. 1978. Gradient analysis and classification of the high elevation red oak community of the Southern Appalachians. M.S. thesis, North Carolina State University, Raleigh. 483 pp.

  • Eyre, F. H., editor. 1980. Forest cover types of the United States and Canada. Society of American Foresters, Washington, DC. 148 pp.

  • Fernald, M. L. 1950. Gray's manual of botany. Eighth edition. A handbook of the flowering plants and ferns of the central and northeastern United States and Adjacent Canada. American Book Co., New York.

  • Fleming, G. P., P. P. Coulling, D. P. Walton, K. M. McCoy, and M. R. Parrish. 2001. The natural communities of Virginia: Classification of ecological community groups. First approximation. Natural Heritage Technical Report 01-1. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond, VA. 76 pp.

  • Fleming, G. P., and K. D. Patterson. 2009a. A vegetation classification for the Appalachian Trail: Virginia south to Georgia. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage. In-house analysis, March 2009.

  • Fleming, G. P., and K. D. Patterson. 2009b. Classification of selected Virginia montane wetland groups. In-house analysis, December 2009. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond.

  • Fleming, G. P., and K. D. Patterson. 2011a. Natural communities of Virginia: Ecological groups and community types. Natural Heritage Technical Report 11-07. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond. 34 pp.

  • Fleming, G. P., and P. P. Coulling. 2001. Ecological communities of the George Washington and Jefferson national forests, Virginia. Preliminary classification and description of vegetation types. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond, VA. 317 pp.

  • Fleming, Gary P. Personal communication. Ecologist, Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond, VA.

  • Golden, M. S. 1974. Forest vegetation and site relationships in the central portion of the Great Smoky Mountains National Park. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Tennessee, Knoxville. 275 pp.

  • Kartesz, J. T. 1999. A synonymized checklist and atlas with biological attributes for the vascular flora of the United States, Canada, and Greenland. First edition. In: J. T. Kartesz and C. A. Meacham. Synthesis of the North American Flora, Version 1.0. North Carolina Botanical Garden, Chapel Hill, NC.

  • McDougal, K. M., and C. R. Parks. 1984. Elevational variation in foliar flavonoids of Quercus rubra L. (Fagaceae). American Journal of Botany 71:301-308.

  • McNab, W. H., and S. A. Browning. 1993. Preliminary ecological classification of arborescent communities on the Wine Spring Creek watershed, Nantahala National Forest. Pages 213-221 in: J. C. Brissette, editor. Proceedings of the Seventh Biennial Southern Silvicultural Research Conference. General Technical Report SO-93. USDA Forest Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station, New Orleans, LA.

  • NatureServe Ecology - Southeastern United States. No date. Unpublished data. NatureServe, Durham, NC.

  • Patterson, K. D. 1994. Classification of vegetation in Ellicott Rock Wilderness, Southeastern Blue Ridge Escarpment. M.S. thesis, North Carolina State University, Raleigh. 91 pp.

  • Peet, R. K., T. R. Wentworth, M. P. Schafale, and A.S. Weakley. No date. Unpublished data of the North Carolina Vegetation Survey. University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.

  • Pittillo, J. D., and G. A. Smathers. 1979. Phytogeography of the Balsam Mountains and Pisgah Ridge, southern Appalachian Mountains. Pages 206-245 in: H. Lieth and E. Landolt, editors. Proceedings of the 16th International phytogeographic excursion. Veroff. Geobot. Inst., Stiftung Rubel, Zurich.

  • Pyne, M. 1994. Tennessee natural communities. Unpublished document. Tennessee Department of Conservation, Ecology Service Division, Nashville. 7 pp.

  • Rawinski, T. J. 1992. A classification of Virginia's indigenous biotic communities: Vegetated terrestrial, palustrine, and estuarine community classes. Unpublished document. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage. Natural Heritage Technical Report No. 92-21. Richmond, VA. 25 pp.

  • Schafale, M. 1998b. Fourth approximation guide. High mountain communities. March 1998 draft. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Raleigh.

  • Schafale, M. P. 2012. Classification of the natural communities of North Carolina, 4th Approximation. North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, Division of Parks and Recreation, Natural Heritage Program, Raleigh.

  • Schafale, M. P., and A. S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the natural communities of North Carolina. Third approximation. North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, Division of Parks and Recreation, Natural Heritage Program, Raleigh. 325 pp.

  • Southeastern Ecology Working Group of NatureServe. No date. International Ecological Classification Standard: International Vegetation Classification. Terrestrial Vegetation. NatureServe, Durham, NC.

  • Stephenson, S. L., and H. S. Adams. 1989. The high-elevation red oak (Quercus rubra) community type in western Virginia. Castanea 54:217-229.

  • TDNH [Tennessee Division of Natural Heritage]. No date. Unpublished data. Tennessee Division of Natural Heritage, Nashville, TN.

  • USFS [U.S. Forest Service]. 1988. Silvicultural examination and prescription field book. USDA Forest Service, Southern Region. Atlanta, GA. 35 pp.

  • Weakley, A. S. 1997. Flora of the Carolinas and Virginia. Unpublished May draft. The Nature Conservancy, Southeast Regional Office, Chapel Hill, NC.

  • Whigham, D. F. 1969. Vegetation patterns on the north slopes of Bluff Mountain, Ashe County, North Carolina. Journal of the Elisha Mitchell Scientific Society 85:1-15.

  • Whittaker, R. H. 1956. Vegetation of the Great Smoky Mountains. Ecological Monographs 26:1-80.


Use Guidelines and Citation

The Small Print: Trademark, Copyright, Citation Guidelines, Restrictions on Use, and Information Disclaimer.

Note: All species and ecological community data presented in NatureServe Explorer at http://explorer.natureserve.org were updated to be current with NatureServe's central databases as of November 2016.
Note: This report was printed on

Trademark Notice: "NatureServe", NatureServe Explorer, The NatureServe logo, and all other names of NatureServe programs referenced herein are trademarks of NatureServe. Any other product or company names mentioned herein are the trademarks of their respective owners.

Copyright Notice: Copyright © 2017 NatureServe, 4600 N. Fairfax Dr., 7th Floor, Arlington Virginia 22203, U.S.A. All Rights Reserved. Each document delivered from this server or web site may contain other proprietary notices and copyright information relating to that document. The following citation should be used in any published materials which reference the web site.

Citation for data on website including State Distribution, Watershed, and Reptile Range maps:
NatureServe. 2017. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. Version 7.1. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Available http://explorer.natureserve.org. (Accessed:

Citation for Bird Range Maps of North America:
Ridgely, R.S., T.F. Allnutt, T. Brooks, D.K. McNicol, D.W. Mehlman, B.E. Young, and J.R. Zook. 2003. Digital Distribution Maps of the Birds of the Western Hemisphere, version 1.0. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Acknowledgement Statement for Bird Range Maps of North America:
"Data provided by NatureServe in collaboration with Robert Ridgely, James Zook, The Nature Conservancy - Migratory Bird Program, Conservation International - CABS, World Wildlife Fund - US, and Environment Canada - WILDSPACE."

Citation for Mammal Range Maps of North America:
Patterson, B.D., G. Ceballos, W. Sechrest, M.F. Tognelli, T. Brooks, L. Luna, P. Ortega, I. Salazar, and B.E. Young. 2003. Digital Distribution Maps of the Mammals of the Western Hemisphere, version 1.0. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Acknowledgement Statement for Mammal Range Maps of North America:
"Data provided by NatureServe in collaboration with Bruce Patterson, Wes Sechrest, Marcelo Tognelli, Gerardo Ceballos, The Nature Conservancy-Migratory Bird Program, Conservation International-CABS, World Wildlife Fund-US, and Environment Canada-WILDSPACE."

Citation for Amphibian Range Maps of the Western Hemisphere:
IUCN, Conservation International, and NatureServe. 2004. Global Amphibian Assessment. IUCN, Conservation International, and NatureServe, Washington, DC and Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Acknowledgement Statement for Amphibian Range Maps of the Western Hemisphere:
"Data developed as part of the Global Amphibian Assessment and provided by IUCN-World Conservation Union, Conservation International and NatureServe."

NOTE: Full metadata for the Bird Range Maps of North America is available at:
http://www.natureserve.org/library/birdDistributionmapsmetadatav1.pdf.

Full metadata for the Mammal Range Maps of North America is available at:
http://www.natureserve.org/library/mammalsDistributionmetadatav1.pdf.

Restrictions on Use: Permission to use, copy and distribute documents delivered from this server is hereby granted under the following conditions:
  1. The above copyright notice must appear in all copies;
  2. Any use of the documents available from this server must be for informational purposes only and in no instance for commercial purposes;
  3. Some data may be downloaded to files and altered in format for analytical purposes, however the data should still be referenced using the citation above;
  4. No graphics available from this server can be used, copied or distributed separate from the accompanying text. Any rights not expressly granted herein are reserved by NatureServe. Nothing contained herein shall be construed as conferring by implication, estoppel, or otherwise any license or right under any trademark of NatureServe. No trademark owned by NatureServe may be used in advertising or promotion pertaining to the distribution of documents delivered from this server without specific advance permission from NatureServe. Except as expressly provided above, nothing contained herein shall be construed as conferring any license or right under any NatureServe copyright.
Information Warranty Disclaimer: All documents and related graphics provided by this server and any other documents which are referenced by or linked to this server are provided "as is" without warranty as to the currentness, completeness, or accuracy of any specific data. NatureServe hereby disclaims all warranties and conditions with regard to any documents provided by this server or any other documents which are referenced by or linked to this server, including but not limited to all implied warranties and conditions of merchantibility, fitness for a particular purpose, and non-infringement. NatureServe makes no representations about the suitability of the information delivered from this server or any other documents that are referenced to or linked to this server. In no event shall NatureServe be liable for any special, indirect, incidental, consequential damages, or for damages of any kind arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information contained in any documents provided by this server or in any other documents which are referenced by or linked to this server, under any theory of liability used. NatureServe may update or make changes to the documents provided by this server at any time without notice; however, NatureServe makes no commitment to update the information contained herein. Since the data in the central databases are continually being updated, it is advisable to refresh data retrieved at least once a year after its receipt. The data provided is for planning, assessment, and informational purposes. Site specific projects or activities should be reviewed for potential environmental impacts with appropriate regulatory agencies. If ground-disturbing activities are proposed on a site, the appropriate state natural heritage program(s) or conservation data center can be contacted for a site-specific review of the project area (see Visit Local Programs).

Feedback Request: NatureServe encourages users to let us know of any errors or significant omissions that you find in the data through (see Contact Us). Your comments will be very valuable in improving the overall quality of our databases for the benefit of all users.

Copyright 2017
NatureServe
Version 7.1 (2 February 2009)
Data last updated: November 2016