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 >>

Nuphar advena Tidal Marsh
Translated Name: Broadleaf Pond-lily Tidal Marsh
Common Name: Broadleaf Pond-lily Tidal Marsh
Unique Identifier: CEGL004472
Classification Approach: International Vegetation Classification (IVC)
Summary: This association comprises submerged freshwater tidal mudflats of coastal rivers along the Atlantic Coast that are dominated by Nuphar advena (= Nuphar lutea ssp. advena). This association occurs at low elevations within freshwater tidal marshes, within tidal range but beyond the influence of salinity. It generally occurs below mean low-water level where water depth is approximately 1-3 m or less. It receives a relatively long duration of flooding and is infrequently exposed at only the lowest tides. The association occurs on unconsolidated tidal mudflats and submerged point bars of large coastal river meanders adjacent to open water of river or tidal creek channels. Substrate is silty alluvial mud that is reported to be high in organic matter content at some sites; soil samples from 10 Virginia sites for this vegetation vary in humic matter content from 2 to 26% (mean = 11.5%). Vegetation of this association is characterized by large clonal stands of dense leafy forbs dominated by Nuphar advena. Associated species tend to occur as scattered individuals and include Peltandra virginica, which can also be locally codominant, Pontederia cordata, Zizania aquatica, Sagittaria latifolia, Bidens laevis, Acorus calamus, and/or Schoenoplectus fluviatilis. Nuphar advena forms nearly monotypic stands early in the growing season. Associated species emerge later in the season and can eventually overtop Nuphar plants, which senesce and tend to become insect-infested in late summer. Submerged aquatic species can occur in this association, including Potamogeton epihydrus, Ceratophyllum demersum, and the invasive exotic Hydrilla verticillata.



Classification

Classification Confidence: High
Classification Comments: In Virginia, this association is apparently absent from larger tidal rivers such as the Rappahannock and James rivers, where discharge and ebb currents are too great to permit the development of wide estuarine meanders and the deposition of extensive bars of silty clay (Coulling 2002). Taxonomic ambiguity between Nuphar advena (= Nuphar lutea ssp. advena) and Nuphar variegata (= Nuphar lutea ssp. variegata) in past inventory efforts obscures our current understanding of the range of this type in New England. More data are needed to determine the complete range with greater confidence.

Vegetation Hierarchy
Class 2 - Shrub & Herb Vegetation
Subclass 2.C - Shrub & Herb Wetland
Formation 2.C.4 - Temperate to Polar Freshwater Marsh, Wet Meadow & Shrubland
Division 2.C.4.Ne - Atlantic & Gulf Coastal Marsh, Wet Meadow & Shrubland
Macrogroup Atlantic & Gulf Coastal Fresh-Oligohaline Tidal Marsh
Group Atlantic & Gulf Coastal Fresh-Oligohaline Tidal Marsh
Alliance Pond-lily Tidal Freshwater Marsh

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

Similar Associations
Unique Identifier Name
CEGL002386 Nuphar advena - Nymphaea odorata Aquatic Vegetation
CEGL004706 Peltandra virginica - Pontederia cordata Tidal Marsh



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
Delaware Pond-lily Tidal Marsh Equivalent Certain Coxe 2009
Maryland Nuphar advena Tidal Herbaceous Vegetation Equivalent Certain Harrison 2011
New Jersey Nuphar advena Tidal Herbaceous Vegetation Equivalent Certain Breden et al. 2001
New York Freshwater tidal marsh Broader   Edinger et al. 2002
North Carolina Tidal Freshwater Marsh (Broadleaf Pondlily Subtype) Equivalent Certain Schafale 2012
Pennsylvania Riverbank Freshwater Tidal Marsh Broader   Zimmerman et al. 2012


Other Related Concepts
Related Concept Name: Ceratophyllum demersum - Nuphar advena Freshwater Tidal Mudflat
Relationship: = - Equivalent
Reference: Walton, D. P., P. P. Coulling, J. Weber, A. Belden, Jr., and A. C. Chazal. 2001. A plant community classification and natural heritage inventory of the Pamunkey River floodplain. Unpublished report submitted to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Natural Heritage Technical Report 01-19. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond. 200 pp. plus appendices.
Related Concept Name: Nuphar advena - (Ceratophyllum demersum) Tidal Herbaceous Vegetation
Relationship: = - Equivalent
Reference: Coulling, P. P. 2002. A preliminary classification of tidal marsh, shrub swamp, and hardwood swamp vegetation and assorted non-tidal, chiefly non-maritime, herbaceous wetland communities of the Virginia Coastal Plain. October 2002. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage. Natural Heritage Technical Report 02-18. 30 pp.
Related Concept Name: Nuphar advena - Peltandra virginica Tidal Herbaceous Vegetation
Relationship: ? - Undetermined
Reference: Coulling, P. P. 2002. A preliminary classification of tidal marsh, shrub swamp, and hardwood swamp vegetation and assorted non-tidal, chiefly non-maritime, herbaceous wetland communities of the Virginia Coastal Plain. October 2002. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage. Natural Heritage Technical Report 02-18. 30 pp.
Related Concept Name: Nuphar advena - Peltandra virginica Tidally Flooded Herbaceous Vegetation
Relationship: ? - Undetermined
Reference: McCoy, K. M., and G. P. Fleming. 2000. Ecological communities of U.S. Army Garrison, Fort Belvoir, Fort Belvoir, Virginia. Unpublished report submitted to the U.S. Army. Natural Heritage Technical Report 00-08. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond. 156 pp. plus appendices.
Related Concept Name: Nuphar advena
Relationship: = - Equivalent
Reference: Good, R. E., and N. F. Good. 1975b. Vegetation and production of the Woodbury Creek and Hessian Run freshwater tidal marshes. Bartonia 43:38-45.
Related Concept Name: Nuphar advena Tidal Herbaceous Vegetation
Relationship: = - Equivalent
Reference: Harrison, J. W. 2001. Herbaceous tidal wetland communities of Maryland's eastern shore: Identification, assessment and monitoring. Report submitted to the U.S. EPA (Clean Water Act 1998 State Wetlands Protection Development Grant Program). Biodiversity Program, Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Wildlife and Heritage Division. 30 June 2001. [U.S. EPA Reference Wetland Natural communities of Maryland's Herbaceous Tidal Wetlands Grant #CD993724].
Relationship: ? - Undetermined
Reference: Clancy, K. 1996. Natural communities of Delaware. Unpublished review draft. Delaware Natural Heritage Program, Division of Fish and Wildlife, Delaware Division of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Smyrna, DE. 52 pp.
Related Concept Name: Nuphar lutea ssp. advena - (Ceratophyllum demersum) Tidal Herbaceous Vegetation
Relationship: = - Equivalent
Reference: VDNH [Virginia Division of Natural Heritage]. 2003. The natural communities of Virginia: Hierarchical classification of community types. Unpublished document, working list of November 2003. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Ecology Group, Richmond.
Related Concept Name: Nuphar lutea ssp. advena Tidal Herbaceous Vegetation
Relationship: = - Equivalent
Reference: Harrison, J. W., compiler. 2004. Classification of vegetation communities of Maryland: First iteration. A subset of the International Classification of Ecological Communities: Terrestrial Vegetation of the United States, NatureServe. Maryland Natural Heritage Program, Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Annapolis. 243 pp.
Related Concept Name: FW Tidal Marsh
Relationship: ? - Undetermined
Reference: Rawinski, T. 1984a. Natural community description abstract - southern New England calcareous seepage swamp. Unpublished report. The Nature Conservancy, Boston, MA. 6 pp.
Related Concept Name: Freshwater Tidal Marsh complex
Relationship: ? - Undetermined
Reference: Breden, T. F. 1989. A preliminary natural community classification for New Jersey. Pages 157-191 in: E. F. Karlin, editor. New Jersey's rare and endangered plants and animals. Institute for Environmental Studies, Ramapo College, Mahwah, NJ. 280 pp.
Related Concept Name: Freshwater Tidal Marsh: Mud Flat Type
Relationship: ? - Undetermined
Reference: McCoy, K. M., and G. P. Fleming. 2000. Ecological communities of U.S. Army Garrison, Fort Belvoir, Fort Belvoir, Virginia. Unpublished report submitted to the U.S. Army. Natural Heritage Technical Report 00-08. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond. 156 pp. plus appendices.
Related Concept Name: Tidal Freshwater Marsh
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.
Relationship: B - Broader
Reference: Harrison, J. W., compiler. 2004. Classification of vegetation communities of Maryland: First iteration. A subset of the International Classification of Ecological Communities: Terrestrial Vegetation of the United States, NatureServe. Maryland Natural Heritage Program, Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Annapolis. 243 pp.
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: Tidal Freshwater Marsh (Pondlily Subtype)
Relationship: = - Equivalent
Reference: Schafale, M. 2000. Fourth approximation guide. Coastal Plain. January 2000 draft. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Raleigh.

Ecological Systems Placement

Ecological Systems Placement
Ecological System Unique ID Ecological System Name
CES203.259 Atlantic Coastal Plain Embayed Region Tidal Freshwater Marsh
CES203.516 Northern Atlantic Coastal Plain Fresh and Oligohaline Tidal Marsh


NatureServe Conservation Status
Global Status: G4G5 (19Jan2006)
Rounded Global Status: G4 - Apparently Secure
Reasons: This vegetation ranges from Delaware Bay to North Carolina, with a discontinuous range north to Maine. It occurs in the freshwater tidal portions of large rivers and embayments and can occupy large patches. This vegetation is vulnerable to pollution from coastal run-off as well as oil spills off the coast.

Distribution
Color legend for Distribution Map
United States Distribution: DC, DE, MD, ME, NC, NJ, NY, PA, VA
Global Distribution: United States
Global Range: This association occurs along tidal rivers from New York to North Carolina.

U.S. Forest Service Ecoregions
Domain Name: Humid Temperate Domain
Division Name: Hot Continental Division
Province Name: Eastern Broadleaf Forest (Oceanic) Province
Province Code: 221 Occurrence Status: Confident or certain
Section Name: Lower New England Section
Section Code: 221A Occurrence Status: Confident or certain
Division Name: Subtropical Division
Province Name: Outer Coastal Plain Mixed Forest Province
Province Code: 232 Occurrence Status: Confident or certain
Section Name: Middle Atlantic Coastal Plain Section
Section Code: 232A Occurrence Status: Confident or certain
Section Name: Coastal Plains and Flatwoods, Lower Section
Section Code: 232B Occurrence Status: Confident or certain
Section Name: Atlantic Coastal Flatwoods Section
Section Code: 232C Occurrence Status: Confident or certain


Vegetation

Vegetation Summary: Vegetation of this association is characterized by large clonal stands of dense leafy forbs dominated by Nuphar advena (= Nuphar lutea ssp. advena). Associated species tend to occur as scattered individuals and include Peltandra virginica, which can also be locally codominant, Pontederia cordata, Zizania aquatica, Sagittaria latifolia, Bidens laevis, Acorus calamus, and/or Schoenoplectus fluviatilis. Nuphar advena forms nearly monotypic stands early in the growing season. Associated species emerge later in the season and can eventually overtop Nuphar plants, which senesce and tend to become insect-infested in late summer. Submerged aquatic species can occur in this association, including Potamogeton epihydrus, Ceratophyllum demersum, and the invasive exotic Hydrilla verticillata. In shallower waters, additional mudflat species can occur. In Virginia and Maryland stands, submerged aquatics such as Ceratophyllum demersum may have significant cover, but few other emergent species co-occur, even late in the season. The mean species richness of 19 Virginia and Maryland plot samples was 2 taxa per 100 square meters.

Vegetation Composition (incomplete)
Species Name Rounded Global Status Growth Form Stratum Charact-
eristic
Dominant Constant
Cover Class %
Con-
stancy
%
Nuphar lutea ssp. advena G4 Aquatic herb Floating aquatic  
 
 
Hydrilla verticillata G4 Aquatic herb Submerged aquatic      
 
 


Environmental Setting

Wetland Indicator: Y
Environmental Summary: This association occurs at low elevations within freshwater tidal marshes, within tidal range but beyond the influence of salinity. It generally occurs below mean low-water level where water depth is approximately 1-3 m or less. It receives a relatively long duration of flooding and is infrequently exposed at only the lowest tides. The association occurs on unconsolidated tidal mudflats and submerged point bars of large coastal river meanders adjacent to open water of river or tidal creek channels. Substrate is silty alluvial mud that is reported to be high in organic matter content at some sites; soil samples from 10 Virginia sites for this vegetation vary in humic matter content from 2 to 26% (mean = 11.5%).


Dynamic Processes

Dynamics: Freshwater tidal marshes are naturally dynamic systems that are best developed where there is a major input of freshwater, a daily tidal range of at least 0.5 m, and a geomorphology that tends to constrict and magnify tidal influence in the upper reaches of the estuary (Odum et al. 1984). They are subject to diurnal flooding by tides and seasonal and episodic flooding from river discharge. Plant composition of freshwater tidal marshes generally occurs as a mosaic of patches dominated by a few or a single species. Species composition is determined by species life history characteristics, especially lifeform, phenology and mode of regeneration in response to microhabitat conditions, and the frequency and duration of flooding. Plant composition has seasonal variation.

Landward, this community can grade into other freshwater tidal marsh associations, especially Peltandra virginica - Pontederia cordata Tidal Marsh (CEGL004706). Seaward, this association grades into submerged aquatic vegetation.


Plot Sampling & Classification Analysis

Plots stored in VegBank


Authors/Contributors
Concept Author(s): Eastern/Southeastern Ecology Groups, mod. S.L. Neid
Element Description Edition Date: 11Mar2008
Element Description Author(s): S.L. Neid and G.P. Fleming
NatureServe Conservation Status Factors Edition Date: 19Jan2006
NatureServe Conservation Status Factors Author(s): L.A. Sneddon

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


References
  • Bowman, P. 2000. Draft classification for Delaware. Unpublished draft. Delaware Natural Heritage Program.

  • Breden, T. F. 1989. A preliminary natural community classification for New Jersey. Pages 157-191 in: E. F. Karlin, editor. New Jersey's rare and endangered plants and animals. Institute for Environmental Studies, Ramapo College, Mahwah, NJ. 280 pp.

  • Breden, T. F., Y. R. Alger, K. S. Walz, and A. G. Windisch. 2001. Classification of vegetation communities of New Jersey: Second iteration. Association for Biodiversity Information and New Jersey Natural Heritage Program, Office of Natural Lands Management, Division of Parks and Forestry, New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Trenton.

  • Brumback, W. E., and L. J. Mehrhoff. 1996. Flora Conservanda: New England. The New England Plant Conservation Program (NEPCoP) list of plants in need of conservation. In collaboration with R. W. Enser, S. C. Gawler, R. G. Popp, P. Somers, and D. D. Sperduto, with assistance from W. D. Countryman and C. B. Hellquist.

  • Clancy, K. 1996. Natural communities of Delaware. Unpublished review draft. Delaware Natural Heritage Program, Division of Fish and Wildlife, Delaware Division of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Smyrna, DE. 52 pp.

  • Coulling, P. P. 2002. A preliminary classification of tidal marsh, shrub swamp, and hardwood swamp vegetation and assorted non-tidal, chiefly non-maritime, herbaceous wetland communities of the Virginia Coastal Plain. October 2002. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage. Natural Heritage Technical Report 02-18. 30 pp.

  • Coxe, R. 2009. Guide to Delaware vegetation communities. Spring 2009 edition. State of Delaware, Division of Fish and Wildlife, Delaware Natural Heritage Program, Smyrna.

  • Eastern Ecology Working Group of NatureServe. No date. International Ecological Classification Standard: International Vegetation Classification. Terrestrial Vegetation. NatureServe, Boston, MA.

  • Edinger, G. J., D. J. Evans, S. Gebauer, T. G. Howard, D. M. Hunt, and A. M. Olivero, editors. 2002. Ecological communities of New York state. Second edition. A revised and expanded edition of Carol Reschke's ecological communities of New York state. (Draft for review). New York Natural Heritage Program, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Albany, NY.

  • Fleming, G. P., K. Taverna, and P. P. Coulling. 2007b. Vegetation classification for the National Capitol Region parks, eastern region. Regional (VA-MD-DC) analysis prepared for NatureServe and USGS-NPS Vegetation Mapping Program, March 2007. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond.

  • 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. 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.

  • Good, R. E., and N. F. Good. 1975b. Vegetation and production of the Woodbury Creek and Hessian Run freshwater tidal marshes. Bartonia 43:38-45.

  • Harrison, J. W. 2001. Herbaceous tidal wetland communities of Maryland's eastern shore: Identification, assessment and monitoring. Report submitted to the U.S. EPA (Clean Water Act 1998 State Wetlands Protection Development Grant Program). Biodiversity Program, Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Wildlife and Heritage Division. 30 June 2001. [U.S. EPA Reference Wetland Natural communities of Maryland's Herbaceous Tidal Wetlands Grant #CD993724].

  • Harrison, J. W. 2011. The natural communities of Maryland: 2011 working list of ecological community groups and community types. Unpublished report. Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Wildlife and Heritage Service, Natural Heritage Program, Annapolis. 33 pp.

  • Harrison, J. W., compiler. 2004. Classification of vegetation communities of Maryland: First iteration. A subset of the International Classification of Ecological Communities: Terrestrial Vegetation of the United States, NatureServe. Maryland Natural Heritage Program, Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Annapolis. 243 pp.

  • McCormick, J., R. R. Grant, Jr., and R. Patrick. 1970. Two studies of Tinicum Marsh. In: R. McCormick. The natural features of Tinicum Marsh, with particular emphasis on vegetation. The Conservation Foundation. 104 pp.

  • McCormick, J., and T. Ashbaugh. 1972. Vegetation of a section of Oldmans Creek Tidal Marsh and related areas in Salem and Gloucester counties, New Jersey. Bulletin of the New Jersey Academy of Science 17:31-37.

  • McCoy, K. M., and G. P. Fleming. 2000. Ecological communities of U.S. Army Garrison, Fort Belvoir, Fort Belvoir, Virginia. Unpublished report submitted to the U.S. Army. Natural Heritage Technical Report 00-08. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond. 156 pp. plus appendices.

  • Odum, W. E., T. J. Smith, III, J. K. Hoover, and C. C. McIvor. 1984. The ecology of tidal freshwater marshes of the United States east coast: A community profile. FWS/OBS-83/17. USDI Fish & Wildlife Service, Office of Biological Services, Washington, DC. 176 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.

  • Rawinski, T. 1984a. Natural community description abstract - southern New England calcareous seepage swamp. Unpublished report. The Nature Conservancy, Boston, MA. 6 pp.

  • Reschke, C. 1990. Ecological communities of New York State. New York Natural Heritage Program, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Latham, NY. 96 pp.

  • Rhoads, A. F., and T. A. Block. 2011c. Pennsylvania Natural Heritage Program. Riverbank Freshwater Tidal Marsh Factsheet. Morris Arboretum. [http://www.naturalheritage.state.pa.us/Community.aspx?=30024] (accessed February 13, 2012)

  • Schafale, M. 2000. Fourth approximation guide. Coastal Plain. January 2000 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.

  • VDNH [Virginia Division of Natural Heritage]. 2003. The natural communities of Virginia: Hierarchical classification of community types. Unpublished document, working list of November 2003. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Ecology Group, Richmond.

  • Walton, D. P., P. P. Coulling, J. Weber, A. Belden, Jr., and A. C. Chazal. 2001. A plant community classification and natural heritage inventory of the Pamunkey River floodplain. Unpublished report submitted to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Natural Heritage Technical Report 01-19. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond. 200 pp. plus appendices.

  • Zimmerman, E. A., T. Davis, M. A. Furedi, B. Eichelberger, J. McPherson, S. Seymour, G. Podniesinski, N. Dewar, and J. Wagner, editors. 2012. Terrestrial and palustrine plant communities of Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania Natural Heritage Program, Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Harrisburg. [http://www.naturalheritage.state.pa.us/Communities.aspx]


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