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 taeda - Liquidambar styraciflua Ruderal Forest
Translated Name: Loblolly Pine - Sweetgum Ruderal Forest
Common Name: Ruderal Loblolly Pine - Sweetgum Forest
Unique Identifier: CEGL008462
Classification Approach: International Vegetation Classification (IVC)
Summary: This community type is broadly defined to accommodate mid- to late-successional upland forests strongly codominated by Pinus taeda and Liquidambar styraciflua, resulting from past disturbance (such as agricultural or other land clearing). Understory composition differs based on edaphic site and on age and history. This broadly defined type occupies a variety of edaphic sites, ranging from mesic through dry-mesic sites on a wide variety of (generally acidic) soils. If left unmanaged or undisturbed, this can be a short-lived forest type, which is likely to succeed with greater age into various oak- and oak-pine-dominated forests.



Classification

Classification Confidence: Low
Classification Comments: This community likely occurs along the northern periphery of the Gulf Coast Prairies and Marshes Ecoregion of eastern Texas. The similarity of this association with Pinus taeda / Liquidambar styraciflua - Acer rubrum var. rubrum / Vaccinium stamineum Ruderal Forest (CEGL006011) suggests that a merge with that type should be considered.

Vegetation Hierarchy
Class 1 - Forest & Woodland
Subclass 1.B - Temperate & Boreal Forest & Woodland
Formation 1.B.1 - Warm Temperate Forest & Woodland
Division 1.B.1.Na - Southeastern North American Forest & Woodland
Macrogroup Southeastern North American Ruderal Forest
Group Southeastern Native Ruderal Forest
Alliance Ruderal Loblolly Pine - Tuliptree - Sweetgum Forest

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

Similar Associations
Unique Identifier Name
CEGL002591 Pinus virginiana Ruderal Forest
CEGL006011 Pinus taeda / Liquidambar styraciflua - Acer rubrum var. rubrum / Vaccinium stamineum Ruderal Forest
CEGL006327 Pinus echinata Ruderal Forest
CEGL007105 Pinus taeda - Liriodendron tulipifera / Acer saccharum Ruderal Forest
CEGL007109 Pinus taeda / Saccharum alopecuroidum - Andropogon spp. Ruderal Forest
CEGL007521 Liriodendron tulipifera - Pinus taeda Ruderal Forest
CEGL007528 Pinus taeda - (Pinus echinata) - Quercus falcata - Carya texana / Vaccinium arboreum 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
Delaware Loblolly Pine-Sweetgum Semi-Natural Forest Equivalent Certain Coxe 2009
Louisiana Mixed Hardwood-Loblolly Forest Broader   Smith 1996
Oklahoma Pinus taeda - Liquidambar styraciflua forest alliance Undetermined Not certain Hoagland 2000


Other Related Concepts
Related Concept Name: IF3a. Recently Harvested Timber Land
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: IF3b. Plantation (Hardwood or Conifer)
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: Loblolly Pine - Hardwood (13)
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: Loblolly Pine - Hardwood: 82
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: Mixed Hardwood-Loblolly Forest
Relationship: B - Broader
Reference: Smith, L. M., compiler. 1996a. Natural plant communities in Louisiana currently recognized by the Louisiana Natural Heritage Program. Unpublished document. Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, Natural Heritage Program, Baton Rouge. 2 pp.
Related Concept Name: T1B3aIII6a. Pinus taeda - Liquidambar styraciflua
Relationship: ? - Undetermined
Reference: Foti, T., M. Blaney, X. Li, and K. G. Smith. 1994. A classification system for the natural vegetation of Arkansas. Proceedings of the Arkansas Academy of Science 48:50-53.

Ecological Systems Placement

NatureServe Conservation Status
Global Status: GNA (20Oct2000)
Rounded Global Status: GNA - Not Applicable
Reasons: This forest represents early successional or silviculturally managed vegetation and is thus not of conservation concern and does not receive a conservation status rank.

Distribution
Color legend for Distribution Map
United States Distribution: AL, AR, DE, GA, LA, MD, MS, NC, OK, SC, TN, TX, VA
Global Distribution: United States
Global Range: This altered forest type is widespread in the lowland portions of the southeastern to mid-Atlantic United States, particularly on the Coastal Plain, but also on adjacent inland provinces.

U.S. Forest Service Ecoregions
Domain Name: Humid Temperate Domain
Division Name: Hot Continental Division
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: 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
Section Name: Coastal Plain Middle Section
Section Code: 231B Occurrence Status: Confident or certain
Section Name: Southern Cumberland Plateau Section
Section Code: 231C Occurrence Status: Confident or certain
Section Name: Eastern Gulf Prairies and Marshes Section
Section Code: 231F Occurrence Status: Predicted or probable
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
Section Name: Coastal Plains and Flatwoods, Western Gulf Section
Section Code: 232F Occurrence Status: Confident or certain
Division Name: Prairie Division
Province Name: Prairie Parkland (Subtropical) Province
Province Code: 255 Occurrence Status: Predicted or probable
Section Name: Central Gulf Prairies and Marshes Section
Section Code: 255D Occurrence Status: Predicted or probable


Vegetation

Vegetation Summary: Stands of this community type are strongly codominated by Pinus taeda and Liquidambar styraciflua. Some other species which may be present in stands of this association include Quercus phellos, Quercus nigra, Ulmus alata, Acer rubrum, Quercus michauxii, Nyssa sylvatica, and Prunus serotina, along with Vitis rotundifolia, Toxicodendron radicans, Rubus argutus, Smilax rotundifolia, Eupatorium capillifolium, Eupatorium hyssopifolium, Erigeron strigosus, Solidago gigantea, Ambrosia artemisiifolia, Juncus effusus, Juncus subcaudatus, and the exotics Lespedeza cuneata and Ligustrum sinense. Examples of this association in low-lying areas may also have a dense herbaceous layer of Microstegium vimineum.

Vegetation Composition (incomplete)
Species Name Rounded Global Status Growth Form Stratum Charact-
eristic
Dominant Constant
Cover Class %
Con-
stancy
%
Liquidambar styraciflua GNA Broad-leaved deciduous tree Tree canopy    
 
 
Liriodendron tulipifera GNA Broad-leaved deciduous tree Tree canopy    
 
 
Pinus taeda GNA Needle-leaved tree Tree canopy    
 
 
Ligustrum sinense GNA Broad-leaved evergreen shrub Shrub/sapling (tall & short)      
 
 
Lespedeza cuneata GNA Flowering forb Herb (field)      
 
 
Microstegium vimineum GNA Graminoid Herb (field)      
 
 


Environmental Setting

Wetland Indicator: N
Environmental Summary: Stands of this community type are strongly codominated by Pinus taeda and Liquidambar styraciflua, resulting from past disturbance followed by forest succession. This community type is more influenced by past land-use history than by specific soil differences. However, this community type tends to occur on poorly drained and low-nutrient soils, especially in areas that were farmed heavily in the past. Stands on poorly drained sites have often been subjected to ditching activities.


Dynamic Processes

Dynamics: This is a short-lived forest type, successional following cropping or other land clearing. It generally succeeds with greater age into various oak- and oak-pine-dominated forests.


Plot Sampling & Classification Analysis

Plots stored in VegBank


Authors/Contributors
Concept Author(s): A.S. Weakley
Element Description Edition Date: 23Jul2007
Element Description Author(s): A.S. Weakley, R. White and E. Largay
NatureServe Conservation Status Factors Edition Date: 20Oct2000
NatureServe Conservation Status Factors Author(s): A.S. Weakley

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.

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

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

  • Foti, T., M. Blaney, X. Li, and K. G. Smith. 1994. A classification system for the natural vegetation of Arkansas. Proceedings of the Arkansas Academy of Science 48:50-53.

  • Foti, T., compiler. 1994b. Natural vegetation classification system of Arkansas, draft five. Unpublished document. Arkansas Natural Heritage Commission, Little Rock. 8 pp.

  • Harcombe, P. A., and J. E. Neaville. 1977. Vegetation types of Chambers County, Texas. The Texas Journal of Science 29:209-234.

  • Hoagland, B. 2000. The vegetation of Oklahoma: A classification for landscape mapping and conservation planning. The Southwestern Naturalist 45(4):385-420.

  • LNHP [Louisiana Natural Heritage Program]. 2009. Natural communities of Louisiana. Louisiana Natural Heritage Program, Louisiana Department of Wildlife & Fisheries, Baton Rouge. 46 pp. [http://www.wlf.louisiana.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/page_wildlife/6776-Rare%20Natural%20Communities/LA_NAT_COM.pdf]

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

  • Nordman, C., M. Russo, and L. Smart. 2011. Vegetation types of the Natchez Trace Parkway, based on the U.S. National Vegetation Classification. NatureServe Central Databases (International Ecological Classification Standard: Terrestrial Ecological Classifications). Arlington, VA. Data current as of 11 April 2011. 548 pp.

  • Patterson, K. D. 2008d. Vegetation classification and mapping at George Washington Birthplace National Monument, Virginia. Technical Report NPS/NER/NRTR--2008/099. National Park Service, Philadelphia, PA. 231 pp.

  • Patterson, K. D. 2008e. Vegetation classification and mapping at Petersburg National Battlefield, Virginia. Technical Report NPS/NER/NRTR--2008/127. National Park Service, Philadelphia, PA. 235 pp.

  • Patterson, K. D. 2008f. Vegetation classification and mapping at Richmond National Battlefield Park, Virginia. Technical Report NPS/NER/NRTR--2008/128. National Park Service. Philadelphia, PA. 244 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.

  • Schotz, A., H. Summer, and R. White, Jr. 2008. Vascular plant inventory and ecological community classification for Little River Canyon National Preserve. NatureServe, Durham, NC. 244 pp.

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

  • Smith, L. M., compiler. 1996a. Natural plant communities in Louisiana currently recognized by the Louisiana Natural Heritage Program. Unpublished document. Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, Natural Heritage Program, Baton Rouge. 2 pp.

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • White, R. D., Jr., and M. Pyne. 2003. Vascular plant inventory and plant community classification for Guilford Courthouse National Military Park. Prepared for the National Park Service. NatureServe, Southeast Regional Office, Durham, NC. 124 pp.

  • White, R. D., Jr., and T. Govus. 2003. Vascular plant inventory and plant community classification for Ninety Six National Historic Site. Prepared for the National Park Service. NatureServe, Durham, NC. 146 pp.

  • Zanoni, T. A., P. G. Risser, and I. H. Butler. 1979. Natural areas for Oklahoma. Oklahoma Natural Heritage Program, Norman. 72 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