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 prinus - Quercus alba / Oxydendrum arboreum / Vitis rotundifolia Forest
Translated Name: Chestnut Oak - White Oak / Sourwood / Muscadine Forest
Common Name: Felsic Monadnock Forest
Unique Identifier: CEGL006281
Classification Approach: International Vegetation Classification (IVC)
Summary: This forest, dominated by Quercus prinus, occurs mainly on resistant ridges (monadnocks) over felsic rock of the Piedmont from North Carolina to Alabama. Soils that are well-drained, acidic and nutrient-poor contribute to low species richness. Quercus prinus is dominant or codominant in some occurrences with Quercus alba. Other canopy species include Quercus falcata, Carya alba, Quercus marilandica, Quercus coccinea, Nyssa sylvatica, Acer rubrum, Pinus echinata, and Quercus stellata. The subcanopy is dominated by Oxydendrum arboreum with Cornus florida. The herb and shrub layers are sparse, with Vitis rotundifolia as a typical component.



Classification

Classification Confidence: Low
Classification Comments: Related forests of the low mountains of North Carolina are more floristically related to forests of the mountains not the Piedmont (e.g., with montane shrubs, such as Quercus (prinus, coccinea) / Kalmia latifolia / (Galax urceolata, Gaultheria procumbens) Forest (CEGL006271)).

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 Chestnut Oak - Scarlet Oak Forest

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

Similar Associations
Unique Identifier Name
CEGL006271 Quercus (prinus, coccinea) / Kalmia latifolia / (Galax urceolata, Gaultheria procumbens) Forest
CEGL008431 Quercus prinus - (Quercus coccinea) / Carya pallida / Vaccinium arboreum - Vaccinium pallidum 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These data are subject to substantial ongoing revision and may be out of date for some states.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 Piedmont Monadnock Forest (Typic Subtype) Equivalent Certain Schafale 2012
South Carolina Chestnut oak forest Broader   Nelson 1986


Other Related Concepts
Related Concept Name: Chestnut Oak (52)
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: Chestnut Oak - Scarlet Oak - Yellow Pine (45)
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: Chestnut Oak: 44
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: IA7d. Piedmont Monadnock Forest
Relationship: ? - Undetermined
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: Oligotrophic Forest
Relationship: B - Broader
Reference: 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.
Related Concept Name: Piedmont Monadnock 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: Piedmont Xeric Broadleaf Deciduous-Needleleaf Evergreen Forest
Relationship: ? - Undetermined
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
CES202.339 Southern Piedmont Dry Oak-(Pine) Forest and Woodland


NatureServe Conservation Status
Global Status: G3G4 (15Aug1997)
Rounded Global Status: G3 - Vulnerable

Distribution
Color legend for Distribution Map
United States Distribution: AL, GA, NC, SC
Global Distribution: United States
Global Range: This forest is found in the Piedmont from North Carolina to Alabama, and sparingly in the low mountains of, at least, North Carolina.

U.S. Forest Service Ecoregions
Domain Name: Humid Temperate Domain
Division Name: Subtropical Division
Province Name: Southeastern Mixed Forest Province
Province Code: 231 Occurrence Status: Confident or certain
Section Name: Southern Appalachian Piedmont Section
Section Code: 231A Occurrence Status: Confident or certain


Vegetation

Vegetation Summary: In typical stands of this association, Quercus prinus is dominant (or codominant in some occurrences with Quercus alba). Other canopy species that may be present include Carya glabra, Quercus coccinea, Quercus marilandica, and Pinus virginiana. Other subcanopy species include Acer rubrum and Nyssa sylvatica. Species that may be present in the sparse shrub layer include Vaccinium pallidum, Vaccinium stamineum, Gaylussacia baccata, Gaylussacia frondosa, and Kalmia latifolia. The herb layer contains such species as Vitis rotundifolia, Toxicodendron radicans, Quercus prinus, Chimaphila maculata, Danthonia spicata, Desmodium nudiflorum, Schizachyrium scoparium, Tephrosia virginiana, Hieracium venosum, Coreopsis verticillata, and Pteridium aquilinum. Canopy cover ranges from 60% to approaching 100% except following a natural disturbance. Quercus prinus contributes 75% of the total tree cover. The subcanopy ranges from sparse to fairly dense, while the shrub and herb layers rarely have 25% cover, and frequently have <5%. Most likely because of the dry, acid, low-nutrient soils, this community has relatively low for species richness, i.e., 34.0 species/0.1 ha average in North Carolina (Peet and Christensen 1980). In addition, of the forest types in NC sampled by Peet and Christensen (1980), this is the only type where tree species contributed more than half (66.5%) of understory cover, e.g., less than 1 m tall.

Vegetation Composition (incomplete)
Species Name Rounded Global Status Growth Form Stratum Charact-
eristic
Dominant Constant
Cover Class %
Con-
stancy
%
Carya alba G3 Broad-leaved deciduous tree Tree canopy    
 
 
Quercus falcata G3 Broad-leaved deciduous tree Tree canopy    
 
 
Quercus prinus G3 Broad-leaved deciduous tree Tree canopy    
 
 
Quercus stellata G3 Broad-leaved deciduous tree Tree canopy    
 
 
Pinus echinata G3 Needle-leaved tree Tree canopy    
 
 
Carya alba G3 Broad-leaved deciduous tree Tree subcanopy    
 
 
Carya glabra G3 Broad-leaved deciduous tree Tree subcanopy    
 
 
Cornus florida G3 Broad-leaved deciduous tree Tree subcanopy    
 
 
Oxydendrum arboreum G3 Broad-leaved deciduous tree Tree subcanopy    
 
 
Quercus prinus G3 Broad-leaved deciduous tree Tree subcanopy    
 
 
Amorpha schwerinii G3 Broad-leaved deciduous shrub Shrub/sapling (tall & short)      
 
 
Fothergilla major G3 Broad-leaved deciduous shrub Shrub/sapling (tall & short)      
 
 
Monotropsis odorata G3 Flowering forb Herb (field)      
 
 
Smilax biltmoreana G3 Flowering forb Herb (field)      
 
 
Thermopsis mollis G3 Flowering forb Herb (field)      
 
 


At-Risk Species Reported for this Association
Scientific Name
  (Common Name)
NatureServe Global Status U.S. Endangered Species Act Status
Amorpha schwerinii
  (Schwerin Indigobush)
G3G4  
Fothergilla major
  (Mountain Witch-alder)
G3  
Monotropsis odorata
  (Sweet Pinesap)
G3  
Thermopsis mollis
  (Allegheny Mountain Golden-banner)
G3G4  

Vegetation Structure
Stratum Growth Form
Height of Stratum (m)
Cover
Class
%
Min
Cover %
Max
Cover %
Tree canopy Broad-leaved deciduous tree
 
 
 
 
Tree subcanopy Broad-leaved deciduous tree
 
 
 
 


Environmental Setting

Wetland Indicator: N
Environmental Summary: This forest occurs mainly on resistant ridges (monadnocks) over felsic rock of the Piedmont and sparingly in the low mountains. It most often is found on resistant ridges (monadnocks) of quartzite, rhyolite, and pyrophyllite; soil series include Nason, Georgeville, Tatum, Uwharrie (Typic Hapludults), Davidson (Rhodic Paleudult), and Goldston (Ruptic-Ultic Dystrochrept) (Schafale and Weakley 1990). These soils are well-drained, acidic, nutrient-poor, and rocky. Community occurrences are found in exposed locations and, consequently, lightning strikes and high winds are common. Fires are probably more common than in most other Piedmont forest types, but most would have little effect on the community because most of the species are fire tolerant and the shrub and herb layers are sparse.


Dynamic Processes

Dynamics: Individual tree death is probably the most common natural disturbance to effect composition or structure of this community. Fire and, especially, wind damage are not uncommon events in occurrences of this forest, although the frequency with which each occurs is not known. Most of the species of this community are fire-tolerant. This community may be considered a topo-edaphic climax in most of the situations in which it occurs.


Plot Sampling & Classification Analysis

Plots stored in VegBank


Authors/Contributors
Concept Author(s): S. Landaal
Element Description Edition Date: 22Feb2007
Element Description Author(s): S. Landaal and M. Pyne
NatureServe Conservation Status Factors Edition Date: 15Aug1997

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.

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

  • Nelson, J. B. 1986. The natural communities of South Carolina: Initial classification and description. South Carolina Wildlife and Marine Resources Department, Division of Wildlife and Freshwater Fisheries, Columbia, SC. 55 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.

  • Peet, R. K., and N. L. Christensen. 1980. Hardwood forest vegetation of the North Carolina Piedmont. Veroffentlichungen des Geobotanischen Institutes der ETH, Stiftung Rubel 68:14-39.

  • 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. 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.

  • Schotz, Al. Personal communication. Community Ecologist. Alabama Natural Heritage Program. Huntingdon College, Massey Hall, 1500 East Fairview Avenue, Montgomery, AL 36106-2148.

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

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

  • Wells, E. F. 1974. A vascular flora of the Uwharrie Wildlife Management Area, Montgomery County, North Carolina. Castanea 39:39-57.

  • White, Jr., R. D., and T. Govus. 2005. Vascular plant inventory and plant community classification for Kings Mountain National Military Park. NatureServe, Durham, NC. 178 pp.


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