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 >>

Pinus strobus Ruderal Forest
Translated Name: Eastern White Pine Ruderal Forest
Common Name: Ruderal Eastern White Pine Forest
Unique Identifier: CEGL007944
Classification Approach: International Vegetation Classification (IVC)
Summary: This is an early-successional forest dominated by Pinus strobus, typically with a very dense canopy and little understory. It is considered ruderal because it is commonly associated with anthropogenic disturbance (e.g., former old fields and formerly cleared flats along streams) that have caused a mix of species not found with natural disturbances. Associated woody and herbaceous species vary with geography. In the northeastern states, the tree canopy is often monotypic and even-aged, with occasional associates including Acer rubrum, Juniperus virginiana, Liriodendron tulipifera (within its range), or scattered Quercus rubra or Quercus velutina. In regions where northern hardwoods are more prevalent, canopy associates include Fraxinus americana and Acer saccharum. In the Southern Blue Ridge and nearby areas, typical canopy and subcanopy associates include Liriodendron tulipifera, Acer rubrum, Pinus rigida, and Liquidambar styraciflua, with Tsuga canadensis often forming a dense shrub stratum. The understory is typically poorly developed or characterized by scattered individuals found in the canopy. The herbaceous cover is variable depending on the density of tree and shrub cover, and may be characterized by ruderal or exotic species that favor openings or disturbance. In more open stands, typical species are those associated with old fields, including Solidago rugosa, Solidago gigantea, Anthoxanthum odoratum, Poa pratensis, Schizachyrium scoparium, Elymus repens (= Elytrigia repens), Bromus inermis, Agrostis gigantea, Euthamia graminifolia, Achillea millefolium, and Daucus carota. In stands that are more heavily forested, typical herbs include Aralia nudicaulis, Ageratina altissima, Galium triflorum, Maianthemum canadense, Trientalis borealis, Mitchella repens, Polystichum acrostichoides, and Lycopodium species. The particular composition of the herb layer will vary with geography. The substrate is usually covered by a thick layer of pine needle duff. In the Daniel Boone National Forest of Kentucky, Pinus strobus is spreading from plantings, especially in the Red River Gorge.



Classification

Classification Confidence: High
Classification Comments: This semi-natural type may be expected to occur throughout the range of the alliance but has primarily been attributed in areas where The Nature Conservancy ecoregional planning or other project-specific needs have documented its occurrence. Rangewide review should greatly expand its geographic scope. Association may need to be split based on northern hardwood associates and central hardwood associates.

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 Eastern North American Ruderal Forest
Group Eastern North American Native Ruderal Forest
Alliance Ruderal Eastern Red-cedar - Virginia Pine - Mixed Conifer Forest

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



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
Maryland Pinus strobus Successional Forest Equivalent Certain Harrison 2011
Massachusetts Successional White Pine Forest Broader   Swain and Kearsley 2001
New York Successional northern hardwoods Broader Certain Edinger et al. 2002
West Virginia Pinus strobus Successional Forest Equivalent Certain WVNHP unpubl. data


Other Related Concepts
Related Concept Name: Pinus strobus / (Diphasiastrum digitatum, Lycopodium obscurum) forest
Relationship: = - Equivalent
Reference: Vanderhorst, J. 2001b. Plant communities of the New River Gorge National River, West Virginia: Northern and southern thirds. Non-game Wildlife and Natural Heritage Program, West Virginia Division of Natural Resources. Elkins. 146 pp.
Related Concept Name: Eastern White Pine Successional Forest
Relationship: = - Equivalent
Reference: Edinger, G. J., A. L. Feldmann, T. G. Howard, J. J. Schmid, F. C. Sechler, E. Eastman, E. Largay, and L. A. Sneddon. 2007. Vegetation classification and mapping of vegetation at Saratoga National Historical Park. Draft Technical Report NPS/NER/NRTR--XXXX/XXX. National Park Service, Northeast Region, Coastal Institute in Kingston, University of Rhode Island, Kingston, RI.
Related Concept Name: Semi-Natural
Relationship: B - Broader
Reference: Faber-Langendoen, D., editor. 2001. Plant communities of the Midwest: Classification in an ecological context. Association for Biodiversity Information, Arlington, VA. 61 pp. plus appendix (705 pp.).
Relationship: B - Broader
Reference: MNNHP [Minnesota Natural Heritage Program]. 1993. Minnesota's native vegetation: A key to natural communities. Version 1.5. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Natural Heritage Program, St. Paul, MN. 110 pp.
Related Concept Name: Successional / Modified Terrestrial Forest
Relationship: B - Broader
Reference: Fleming, G. P., P. P. Coulling, K. D. Patterson, and K. Taverna. 2006. The natural communities of Virginia: Classification of ecological community groups. Second approximation. Version 2.2. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond. [http://www.dcr.virginia.gov/natural_heritage/ncTIV.shtml]
Related Concept Name: White Pine - White Oak - Chestnut Oak Type
Relationship: B - Broader
Reference: Schmalzer, P. A., and H. R. DeSelm. 1982. Vegetation, endangered and threatened plants, critical plant habitats and vascular flora of the Obed Wild and Scenic River. Unpublished report. USDI National Park Service, Obed Wild and Scenic River. 2 volumes. 369 pp.
Related Concept Name: semi-natural
Relationship: ? - Undetermined
Reference: Chapman, K. A., D. A. Albert, and G. A. Reese. 1989. Draft descriptions of Michigan's natural community types. Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Lansing, MI. 35 pp.

Ecological Systems Placement

NatureServe Conservation Status
Global Status: GNA (23Jun2013)
Rounded Global Status: GNA - Not Applicable
Reasons: This forest represents semi-natural vegetation, i.e., the vegetation contains combinations of species that are not found under natural disturbance regimes, many of them exotic. Thus it is not of high conservation concern and does not receive a conservation status rank.

Distribution
Color legend for Distribution Map
United States Distribution: CT, GA, KY, MA, MDpotentially occurs, ME, MI, MN, NC, NH, NJpotentially occurs, NY, OHpotentially occurs, PA, RI, SC, TN, VA, VT, WI, WV
Global Distribution: United States
Global Range: This semi-natural type may be expected to occur throughout the range of the alliance (i.e., from Michigan, northern Wisconsin, northern and eastern Minnesota, extreme northeastern Iowa, and from Maine and New Hampshire south to Georgia and Tennessee, as well as in Ontario, Canada). It has been documented primarily in areas where project-specific needs have required it.

U.S. Forest Service Ecoregions
Domain Name: Humid Temperate Domain
Division Name: Warm Continental Division
Province Name: Laurentian Mixed Forest Province
Province Code: 212 Occurrence Status: Confident or certain
Section Name: Northern Glaciated Allegheny Plateau Section
Section Code: 212F Occurrence Status: Confident or certain
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
Section Name: Hudson Valley Section
Section Code: 221B Occurrence Status: Confident or certain
Section Name: Northern Appalachian Piedmont Section
Section Code: 221D Occurrence Status: Confident or certain
Section Name: Western Unglaciated Allegheny Plateau Section
Section Code: 221F Occurrence Status: Confident or certain
Section Name: Northern Cumberland Plateau Section
Section Code: 221H Occurrence Status: Confident or certain
Province Name: Eastern Broadleaf Forest (Continental) Province
Province Code: 222 Occurrence Status: Confident or certain
Section Name: Interior Low Plateau, Highland Rim Section
Section Code: 222E Occurrence Status: Confident or certain
Division Name: Warm Continental Regime Mountains
Province Name: Adirondack-New England Mixed Forest - Coniferous Forest - Alpine Meadow Province
Province Code: M212 Occurrence Status: Confident or certain
Section Name: Vermont-New Hampshire Upland Section
Section Code: M212B Occurrence Status: Confident or certain
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: Allegheny Mountains Section
Section Code: M221B 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: The tree canopy ranges from woodland to forest closure, with 25-85% cover. It is often monotypic and even-aged Pinus strobus, with occasional associates, including Acer rubrum, Betula lenta, Juniperus virginiana, or scattered Quercus rubra or Quercus velutina. In regions where northern hardwoods are more prevalent, canopy associates include Fraxinus americana and Acer saccharum. In the Southern Blue Ridge and nearby areas, typical canopy and subcanopy associates include Liriodendron tulipifera, Acer rubrum, Pinus rigida, and Liquidambar styraciflua, with Tsuga canadensis often forming a dense shrub stratum. The understory is poorly developed or characterized by scattered individuals found in the canopy. Shrubs are often present in the more open stands and include native species, such as Cornus racemosa, Rhus glabra, Viburnum prunifolium, and Rubus spp., as well as exotics, such as Elaeagnus umbellata, Rosa multiflora, Lonicera morrowii, and Berberis thunbergii. The herbaceous cover is variable depending on the density of tree and shrub cover, and may be characterized by ruderal or exotic species that favor openings or disturbance. In more open stands, typical species are those associated with old fields, such as Solidago rugosa, Solidago gigantea, Anthoxanthum odoratum, Poa pratensis, Schizachyrium scoparium, Elymus repens (= Elytrigia repens), Bromus inermis, Agrostis gigantea, Euthamia graminifolia, Achillea millefolium, and Daucus carota. In stands that are more heavily forested, typical herbs include Aralia nudicaulis, Ageratina altissima, Galium triflorum, Maianthemum canadense, Medeola virginiana, Polystichum acrostichoides, Trientalis borealis, Mitchella repens, and Lycopodium species. The particular composition of the herb layer will vary with geography. The substrate is usually covered by a thick layer of pine needle duff.

Vegetation Composition (incomplete)
Species Name Rounded Global Status Growth Form Stratum Charact-
eristic
Dominant Constant
Cover Class %
Con-
stancy
%
Pinus strobus GNA Needle-leaved tree Tree canopy
 
 
Berberis thunbergii GNA Broad-leaved deciduous shrub Shrub/sapling (tall & short)      
 
 
Elaeagnus umbellata GNA Broad-leaved deciduous shrub Shrub/sapling (tall & short)      
 
 
Lonicera morrowii GNA Broad-leaved deciduous shrub Shrub/sapling (tall & short)      
 
 
Rosa multiflora GNA Broad-leaved deciduous shrub Shrub/sapling (tall & short)      
 
 
Achillea millefolium GNA Flowering forb Herb (field)      
 
 
Daucus carota GNA Flowering forb Herb (field)      
 
 
Agrostis gigantea GNA Graminoid Herb (field)      
 
 
Anthoxanthum odoratum GNA Graminoid Herb (field)      
 
 
Elymus repens GNA Graminoid Herb (field)      
 
 


Environmental Setting

Wetland Indicator: N
Environmental Summary: This wide-ranging semi-natural forest is commonly associated with anthropogenic disturbance. It typically occurs on former agricultural lands and old fields that are no longer intensively mowed, plowed or managed, developing as Pinus strobus colonizes the open fields. Associated woody and herbaceous species vary with geography but are typically ruderal or exotic species that favor openings or disturbance.


Dynamic Processes

Dynamics: In the Daniel Boone National Forest of Kentucky, Pinus strobus is spreading from plantings, especially in the Red River Gorge.


Plot Sampling & Classification Analysis

Plots stored in VegBank


Authors/Contributors
Concept Author(s): K.D. Patterson
Element Description Edition Date: 23Jun2013
Element Description Author(s): K.D. Patterson, L.A. Sneddon and S.C. Gawler
NatureServe Conservation Status Factors Edition Date: 23Jun2013
NatureServe Conservation Status Factors Author(s): K.D. Patterson, mod. D. Faber-Langendoen

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


References
  • Chapman, K. A., D. A. Albert, and G. A. Reese. 1989. Draft descriptions of Michigan's natural community types. Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Lansing, MI. 35 pp.

  • Edinger, G. J. 2003b. A calcareous red cedar barrens. The Eastern New York Chapter of The Nature Conservancy, New York Natural Heritage Program, Albany, NY.

  • Edinger, G. J., A. L. Feldmann, T. G. Howard, J. J. Schmid, F. C. Sechler, E. Eastman, E. Largay, and L. A. Sneddon. 2007. Vegetation classification and mapping of vegetation at Saratoga National Historical Park. Draft Technical Report NPS/NER/NRTR--XXXX/XXX. National Park Service, Northeast Region, Coastal Institute in Kingston, University of Rhode Island, Kingston, RI.

  • 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.

  • Faber-Langendoen, D., editor. 2001. Plant communities of the Midwest: Classification in an ecological context. Association for Biodiversity Information, Arlington, VA. 61 pp. plus appendix (705 pp.).

  • Fleming, G. P., P. P. Coulling, K. D. Patterson, and K. Taverna. 2006. The natural communities of Virginia: Classification of ecological community groups. Second approximation. Version 2.2. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond. [http://www.dcr.virginia.gov/natural_heritage/ncTIV.shtml]

  • 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.

  • Gawler, S. C., and P. S. Bowman. 2012. Vegetation classification and mapping at Saint-Gaudens National Historic Site, New Hampshire. Natural Resource Technical Report NPS/NER/NRTR--2012/584.1. National Park Service, Fort Collins, CO.

  • MNNHP [Minnesota Natural Heritage Program]. 1993. Minnesota's native vegetation: A key to natural communities. Version 1.5. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Natural Heritage Program, St. Paul, MN. 110 pp.

  • NRCS [Natural Resources Conservation Service]. 2004a. Soil survey of Saratoga County, New York. USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service. 590 pp.

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

  • Perles, S. J., G. S. Podniesinski, E. Eastman, L. A. Sneddon, and S. C. Gawler. 2007. Classification and mapping of vegetation and fire fuel models at Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area. Technical Report NPS/NER/NRTR--2007/076. National Park Service, Philadelphia, PA. 2 volumes.

  • Schmalzer, P. A., and H. R. DeSelm. 1982. Vegetation, endangered and threatened plants, critical plant habitats and vascular flora of the Obed Wild and Scenic River. Unpublished report. USDI National Park Service, Obed Wild and Scenic River. 2 volumes. 369 pp.

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

  • Swain, P. C., and J. B. Kearsley. 2001. Classification of natural communities of Massachusetts. September 2001 draft. Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program, Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife, Westborough, MA.

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

  • Vanderhorst, J. 2001b. Plant communities of the New River Gorge National River, West Virginia: Northern and southern thirds. Non-game Wildlife and Natural Heritage Program, West Virginia Division of Natural Resources. Elkins. 146 pp.

  • Vanderhorst, J. P., B. P. Streets, J. Jeuck, and S. C. Gawler. 2008. Vegetation classification and mapping of Bluestone National Scenic River, West Virginia. Technical Report NPS/NER/NRTR--2008/106. National Park Service, Philadelphia, PA.

  • Vanderhorst, J. P., J. Jeuck, and S. C. Gawler. 2007. Vegetation classification and mapping of New River Gorge National River, West Virginia. Technical Report NPS/NER/NRTR-2007/092. National Park Service, Philadelphia, PA. 396 pp.

  • WVNHP [West Virginia Natural Heritage Program]. No date (b). Unpublished data. West Virginia Natural Heritage Program, Elkins.

  • White, Jr., R. D. 2003. Vascular plant inventory and plant community classification for Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site. NatureServe, Durham, NC. 160 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