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 >>

Impatiens capensis - Peltandra virginica - Polygonum arifolium - Schoenoplectus fluviatilis - Typha angustifolia Tidal Marsh
Translated Name: Jewelweed - Green Arrow-arum - Halberd-leaf Tearthumb - River Bulrush - Narrowleaf Cattail Tidal Marsh
Common Name: Freshwater Tidal Mixed High Marsh
Unique Identifier: CEGL006325
Classification Approach: International Vegetation Classification (IVC)
Summary: This association occupies the higher elevation zone of freshwater to slightly oligohaline marshes along the Atlantic Coast from Maine to Virginia. In the southern part of the range (northern Virginia, Maryland, and Delaware), this is the principal mixed freshwater tidal marsh community, forming extensive patches. The vegetation is typically mixed and dense, with highly variable species composition and patch dominance. Impatiens capensis, Peltandra virginica, Polygonum spp. (Polygonum arifolium, Polygonum sagittatum, Polygonum punctatum, Polygonum hydropiperoides), Schoenoplectus fluviatilis, and Typha angustifolia are characteristic and often abundant. Other species that may be abundant in a given stand include Leersia oryzoides, Hibiscus moscheutos, Mikania scandens, Sagittaria latifolia, Amaranthus cannabinus, Zizania aquatica, Bidens laevis, Bidens coronata, Pontederia cordata, Typha latifolia, Onoclea sensibilis, and Carex comosa. Additional associates include Boehmeria cylindrica, Acorus calamus, Cicuta maculata var. maculata, Cuscuta gronovii var. gronovii, Apios americana, Schoenoplectus tabernaemontani, Schoenoplectus novae-angliae, Echinochloa walteri, Lycopus americanus, Pilea fontana, Eleocharis palustris, Iris versicolor, and Sium suave. In the northern portion of the range, Carex stricta is also common. On the Connecticut River, Impatiens capensis is less important, and a levee is often present in the high marsh supporting such species as Carex lacustris, Ambrosia trifida, and Eupatorium perfoliatum.



Classification

Classification Confidence: Moderate
Classification Comments: Classification of this type at the southern end of its range is supported by analysis of an 800-plot regional dataset of tidal vegetation assembled for the NCR and Mid-Atlantic region vegetation mapping projects. It is documented by 39 plots from the Chester, Choptank, James, Nanticoke, Pocomoke, and Potomac river drainages in Maryland and Virginia.

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 Mixed Forb Oligohaline Tidal Marsh

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

Similar Associations
Unique Identifier Name
CEGL004314 Carex stricta - Peltandra virginica - Sagittaria (lancifolia ssp. media, latifolia) Tidal Marsh
CEGL004706 Peltandra virginica - Pontederia cordata Tidal Marsh
CEGL006080 Amaranthus cannabinus Tidal Marsh
CEGL006181 Hibiscus moscheutos - Polygonum punctatum - Peltandra virginica 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
Connecticut Sensitive fern - River bulrush - cattail (Onoclea sensibilis - Schoenoplectus fluviatilis - Typha spp.) community Intersects   Metzler and Barrett 2006
Delaware Freshwater Tidal Mixed High Marsh Equivalent Certain Coxe 2009
Maine Freshwater Tidal Marsh Broader   Gawler 2002
Maryland Impatiens capensis - Peltandra virginica - Sagittaria latifolia - (Typha angustifolia) Tidal Herbaceous Vegetation Equivalent Certain Harrison 2011
Massachusetts Freshwater Tidal Marsh Broader   Swain and Kearsley 2001
New Jersey Mixed Forbs High Marsh Tidal Herbaceous Vegetation [Placeholder] Equivalent Certain Breden et al. 2001
New York Freshwater tidal marsh Broader   Edinger et al. 2002
Pennsylvania Freshwater Tidal Mixed High Marsh Equivalent   Zimmerman et al. 2012


Other Related Concepts
Related Concept Name: Bidens laevis - Zizania aquatica var. aquatica - Hibiscus moscheutos Tidal Herbaceous Vegetation
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: Carex lacustris marsh community
Relationship: F - Finer
Reference: Barrett, N. E. 1989. Vegetation of the tidal wetlands of the lower Connecticut River: Ecological relationships of plant community-types with respect to flooding and habitat. M.S. thesis, University of Connecticut, Storrs. 209 pp.
Related Concept Name: Impatiens capensis - Peltandra virginica - Sagittaria latifolia - (Typha angustifolia) 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: Impatiens capensis - Polygonum sagittatum - Zizania aquatica - (Bidens laevis, coronata) 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.
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: Impatiens capensis - Sagittaria latifolia - Peltandra virginica Tidal Herbaceous Vegetation
Relationship: = - Equivalent
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: Onoclea sensibilis - Schoenoplectus fluviatilis - Typha spp. community
Relationship: = - Equivalent
Reference: Metzler, K. J., and J. P. Barrett. 2001. Vegetation classification for Connecticut. Draft 5/21/2001. Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection, Natural Resources Center, Natural Diversity Database, Hartford.
Related Concept Name: Onoclea sensibilis / Thelypteris palustris marsh community
Relationship: F - Finer
Reference: Barrett, N. E. 1989. Vegetation of the tidal wetlands of the lower Connecticut River: Ecological relationships of plant community-types with respect to flooding and habitat. M.S. thesis, University of Connecticut, Storrs. 209 pp.
Related Concept Name: Onoclea sensibilis marsh community
Relationship: F - Finer
Reference: Barrett, N. E. 1989. Vegetation of the tidal wetlands of the lower Connecticut River: Ecological relationships of plant community-types with respect to flooding and habitat. M.S. thesis, University of Connecticut, Storrs. 209 pp.
Related Concept Name: Peltandra virginica - Impatiens capensis - Typha angustifolia Tidal Herbaceous Vegetation
Relationship: = - Equivalent
Reference: Bartgis, R. 1986. Natural community descriptions. Unpublished draft. Maryland Natural Heritage Program, Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Annapolis.
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].
Related Concept Name: Peltandra virginica marsh community
Relationship: F - Finer
Reference: Barrett, N. E. 1989. Vegetation of the tidal wetlands of the lower Connecticut River: Ecological relationships of plant community-types with respect to flooding and habitat. M.S. thesis, University of Connecticut, Storrs. 209 pp.
Related Concept Name: Polygonum punctatum - Bidens coronata Freshwater Marsh
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: Typha latifolia - Scirpus fluviatilis - Carex comosa Tidally Flooded Herbaceous Vegetation
Relationship: F - Finer
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: 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
Relationship: B - Broader
Reference: Gawler, S. C. 2002. Natural landscapes of Maine: A guide to vegetated natural communities and ecosystems. Maine Natural Areas Program, Department of Conservation, Augusta, ME.
Related Concept Name: Freshwater Tidal Marsh Complex, upper tidal zone
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: Mixed Forb Freshwater Tidal Marsh
Relationship: = - Equivalent
Reference: Bowman, P. 2000. Draft classification for Delaware. Unpublished draft. Delaware Natural Heritage Program.
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.

Ecological Systems Placement

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


NatureServe Conservation Status
Global Status: G3 (14Jul2016)
Rounded Global Status: G3 - Vulnerable

Distribution
Color legend for Distribution Map
United States Distribution: CT, DC, DE, MA, MD, ME, NJ, NY, PA, VA
Canadian Province Distribution: QCpotentially occurs
Global Distribution: Canadapotentially occurs, United States
Global Range: This association occurs in freshwater tidal marshes along the Atlantic Coast from Maine to Virginia. Its southern limit is the intertidal portion of the James River in east-central Virginia. In the southern part of the range (northern Virginia, Maryland, and Delaware), this is the principal mixed freshwater tidal marsh community, forming extensive patches along many tidal rivers.

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
Section Name: Hudson Valley Section
Section Code: 221B Occurrence Status: Confident or certain
Section Name: Northern Appalachian Piedmont Section
Section Code: 221D Occurrence Status: Predicted or probable
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: These are mixed, dense, and often diverse marshes with highly variable species composition and patch dominance. Despite compositional variation, Impatiens capensis, Peltandra virginica, Polygonum spp. (Polygonum arifolium, Polygonum sagittatum, Polygonum punctatum, Polygonum hydropiperoides), Schoenoplectus fluviatilis, and Typha angustifolia are characteristic and often abundant. Other species that may be abundant in a given stand include Leersia oryzoides, Hibiscus moscheutos, Mikania scandens, Sagittaria latifolia, Amaranthus cannabinus, Zizania aquatica, Bidens laevis, Bidens coronata, Pontederia cordata, Typha latifolia, Onoclea sensibilis, and Carex comosa. Additional associates include Boehmeria cylindrica, Acorus calamus, Cicuta maculata var. maculata, Cuscuta gronovii var. gronovii, Apios americana, Schoenoplectus tabernaemontani, Schoenoplectus novae-angliae, Echinochloa walteri, Lycopus americanus, Pilea fontana, Eleocharis palustris, Iris versicolor, and Sium suave. In the northern portion of the range, Carex stricta is also common. On the Connecticut River, Impatiens capensis is less important, and a levee is often present in the high marsh supporting such species as Carex lacustris, Ambrosia trifida, and Eupatorium perfoliatum. Mean species richness of 39 Maryland and Virginia plot samples was 19 taxa per 100 square meters. The exotics Murdannia keisak, Lythrum salicaria, and Phragmites australis have all been reported to be invasive in this association in various parts of its range.

Vegetation Composition (incomplete)
Species Name Rounded Global Status Growth Form Stratum Charact-
eristic
Dominant Constant
Cover Class %
Con-
stancy
%
Bidens bidentoides G3 Flowering forb Herb (field)      
 
 
Impatiens capensis G3 Flowering forb Herb (field)  
 
 
Lythrum salicaria G3 Flowering forb Herb (field)      
 
 
Murdannia keisak G3 Flowering forb Herb (field)      
 
 
Peltandra virginica G3 Flowering forb Herb (field)  
 
 
Polygonum arifolium G3 Flowering forb Herb (field)  
 
 
Phragmites australis G3 Graminoid Herb (field)      
 
 
Schoenoplectus fluviatilis G3 Graminoid Herb (field)  
 
 
Typha angustifolia G3 Graminoid Herb (field)  
 
 


At-Risk Species Reported for this Association
Scientific Name
  (Common Name)
NatureServe Global Status U.S. Endangered Species Act Status
Bidens bidentoides
  (Maryland Bur-marigold)
G3G4  
Vegetation Structure Summary: These are mixed, dense, and often diverse marshes with highly variable species composition and patch dominance.


Environmental Setting

Wetland Indicator: Y
Environmental Summary: This association occupies the higher elevation zone of freshwater to slightly oligohaline river marshes. Soils are reported to be highly variable across the range, varying from silts and silty mucks to peats and sands. Samples collected from 18 Chesapeake Bay region plots were mostly dark brown mucky silts (rarely mucky clays) rich in fine organic matter and roots.


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. This association occurs in the higher elevation zones of freshwater tidal marsh systems.


Plot Sampling & Classification Analysis

Plots stored in VegBank


Authors/Contributors
Concept Author(s): Eastern Ecology Group, mod. S.L. Neid, mod. G.P. Fleming and L.A. Sneddon
Element Description Edition Date: 24May2007
Element Description Author(s): S.L. Neid and G.P. Fleming

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


References
  • Barrett, N. E. 1989. Vegetation of the tidal wetlands of the lower Connecticut River: Ecological relationships of plant community-types with respect to flooding and habitat. M.S. thesis, University of Connecticut, Storrs. 209 pp.

  • Barrett, N. E. 1994. Vegetation patch dynamics in freshwater tidal wetlands. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Connecticut. 277 pp.

  • Bartgis, R. 1986. Natural community descriptions. Unpublished draft. Maryland Natural Heritage Program, Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Annapolis.

  • 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.

  • CDPNQ [Centre de données sur le patrimoine naturel du Québec]. No date. Unpublished data. Centre de données sur le patrimoine naturel du Québec, Québec.

  • 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.

  • Gawler, S. C. 2002. Natural landscapes of Maine: A guide to vegetated natural communities and ecosystems. Maine Natural Areas Program, Department of Conservation, Augusta, ME.

  • Gawler, S. C., and A. Cutko. 2010. Natural landscapes of Maine: A classification of vegetated natural communities and ecosystems. Maine Natural Areas Program, Department of Conservation, Augusta.

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • Metzler, K. J., and J. P. Barrett. 2001. Vegetation classification for Connecticut. Draft 5/21/2001. Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection, Natural Resources Center, Natural Diversity Database, Hartford.

  • Metzler, K. J., and J. P. Barrett. 2004. Vegetation classification for Connecticut. Draft. State Geological and Natural History Survey of Connecticut, Department of Environmental Protection, Hartford, CT.

  • Metzler, K., and J. Barrett. 2006. The vegetation of Connecticut: A preliminary classification. State Geological and Natural History Survey, Report of Investigations No. 12. Connecticut Natural Diversity Database, Hartford.

  • 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.

  • 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. 2011b. Pennsylvania Natural Heritage Program. Freshwater Tidal Mixed High Marsh Factsheet. Morris Arboretum. [http://www.naturalheritage.state.pa.us/Community.aspx?=30007] (accessed February 08, 2012)

  • 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.

  • 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