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 >>

Acer rubrum - Fraxinus nigra - Betula alleghaniensis / Veratrum viride - Carex bromoides Seep Forest
Translated Name: Red Maple - Black Ash - Yellow Birch / Green False Hellebore - Bromelike Sedge Seep Forest
Common Name: Central Appalachian Basic Seepage Swamp Forest
Unique Identifier: CEGL008416
Classification Approach: International Vegetation Classification (IVC)
Summary: This community occupies groundwater-saturated stream headwaters, large spring seeps and runs, and lateral areas in ravine and stream bottoms where groundwater emerges at the base of slopes. It is most frequent and best developed on Catoctin Formation metabasalt (greenstone) of the Northern Blue Ridge and other base-rich substrates. Soil chemistry data indicate moderately high calcium and magnesium levels. Overstory composition is mixed, with Acer rubrum, Fraxinus americana, and Liriodendron tulipifera the most abundant species. Fraxinus nigra is a frequent overstory associate but more abundant and sometimes dominant in the understory, along with young Acer rubrum and Fraxinus americana. With increasing elevation, Betula alleghaniensis becomes increasingly important, codominating most stands above 760 m (2500 feet) in Virginia and in the Catoctin Mountains of Maryland. Minor tree associates include Betula lenta and Tilia americana. Canopy closure is often incomplete (mean stratum cover = 60-80%), most evidently because of blowdowns. Very wet microhabitats that impede the establishment and firm rooting of trees may also contribute to a somewhat open canopy. Shrub stratum diversity is moderately high; Lindera benzoin is usually the most abundant species, and considerable stratum cover is contributed by tree saplings. Other frequently occurring true shrubs are Alnus serrulata, Carpinus caroliniana, Hamamelis virginiana, Ilex verticillata, and Sambucus nigra ssp. canadensis. Except in local areas where shrubs are dense, herbaceous cover is high (mean stratum cover = 90%). One or both of the early-maturing forbs Symplocarpus foetidus (mostly at lower elevations) and Veratrum viride are usually dominant over substantial areas. Because of microtopographic diversity, herbaceous patch-mosaics are typical in this vegetation. More-or-less constant, sometimes locally abundant species include Eurybia schreberi (= Aster schreberi), Caltha palustris, Carex bromoides, Carex gynandra, Carex prasina, Chelone glabra, Chrysosplenium americanum, Cinna arundinacea, Dryopteris carthusiana, Dryopteris goldiana, Glyceria striata, Impatiens capensis, Osmunda cinnamomea, Osmunda regalis var. spectabilis, Ranunculus recurvatus, Saxifraga pensylvanica, Packera aurea (= Senecio aureus), Sphenopholis pensylvanica, Thalictrum pubescens, and Viola cucullata. Moss cover is often significant but only rarely includes Sphagnum spp. (not recorded in Virginia plots). Typical upland mesophytes commonly occur in well-drained hummock microhabitats and contribute to relatively high species-richness values for this type of wetland.



Classification

Classification Confidence: Moderate
Classification Comments: Classification of this type is supported by analysis of a 1250-plot regional dataset assembled for the NCR vegetation mapping project. In that analysis, this association is represented by 25 Virginia and Maryland plots that perform as a tight group in all analytical procedures. Distinct floristic features of calcareous seepage swamps include the prevalence of Fraxinus spp. (especially Fraxinus nigra) and nutrient-demanding species, among the most diagnostic of which are Caltha palustris, Carex bromoides, Carex laevivaginata, Pilea fontana, Poa paludigena, Ranunculus hispidus var. caricetorum, Saxifraga pensylvanica, and Trillium cernuum. These communities lack the Sphagnum mosses that characterize acidic groundwater wetlands. Moreover, many vascular plants that are common in or diagnostic of acidic seepage swamps are absent or unimportant (e.g., Pinus rigida, Nyssa sylvatica, Viburnum nudum var. nudum, Parnassia asarifolia, Platanthera ciliaris, Platanthera clavellata, Rubus hispidus, Lycopodium obscurum, Carex debilis var. debilis, and Carex folliculata) (Fleming and Van Alstine 1999).

Additionally, the spectrum of stands representing this association in Virginia shows a clear elevation gradient, with Symplocarpus foetidus and Fraxinus nigra decreasing in frequency and abundance and Betula alleghaniensis assuming codominance as elevation increases. In landscapes with suitably base-rich substrates such as Catoctin metabasalt, this type may intergrade with the higher elevation Tsuga canadensis - Betula alleghaniensis / Veratrum viride - Carex scabrata - Oclemena acuminata Swamp Forest (CEGL008533) in a transitional zone from about 760 to 900 m (2500-3000 feet) elevation.


Vegetation Hierarchy
Class 1 - Forest & Woodland
Subclass 1.B - Temperate & Boreal Forest & Woodland
Formation 1.B.3 - Temperate Flooded & Swamp Forest
Division 1.B.3.Na - Eastern North American-Great Plains Flooded & Swamp Forest
Macrogroup Laurentian-Acadian-North Atlantic Coastal Flooded & Swamp Forest
Group Laurentian-Acadian-Appalachian Acidic Swamp
Alliance Northeastern Red Maple - Green Ash Swamp Forest

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

Similar Associations
Unique Identifier Name
CEGL007046 Acer rubrum - Fraxinus pennsylvanica / Lindera benzoin / Osmunda regalis - Pedicularis lanceolata Seep Forest
CEGL007441 Fraxinus nigra - Acer rubrum / Rhamnus alnifolia / Carex leptalea Swamp Forest
CEGL007853 Acer rubrum - Nyssa sylvatica / Ilex verticillata - Vaccinium fuscatum / Osmunda cinnamomea Seep 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 Central Appalachian Basic Seepage Swamp Equivalent Certain Coxe 2009
Maryland Fraxinus nigra - Liriodendron tulipifera - Acer rubrum / Caltha palustris - Carex bromoides Forest Equivalent Certain Harrison 2011


Other Related Concepts
Related Concept Name: Acer rubrum - Betula alleghaniensis - Fraxinus (americana, nigra) / Carex bromoides Forest
Relationship: = - Equivalent
Reference: Young, J., G. Fleming, P. Townsend, and J. Foster. 2007a. Vegetation of Shenandoah National Park in relation to environmental gradients. Final Report, volume 1.1. Unpublished report submitted to the U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service. 103 pp. plus appendices and GIS products.
Related Concept Name: Acer rubrum - Fraxinus americana - Fraxinus nigra - (Betula alleghaniensis) / Veratrum viride - Carex bromoides Forest
Relationship: = - Equivalent
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: Acer rubrum - Fraxinus americana - Fraxinus nigra / Carex bromoides - Carex prasina - (Caltha palustris) Forest
Relationship: = - Equivalent
Reference: 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.
Related Concept Name: Acer rubrum - Fraxinus nigra / Caltha palustris - Carex bromoides Forest
Relationship: = - Equivalent
Reference: Fleming, G. P. 1999. Plant communities of limestone, dolomite, and other calcareous substrates in the George Washington and Jefferson national forests, Virginia. Natural Heritage Technical Report 99-4. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond. Unpublished report submitted to the USDA Forest Service. 218 pp. plus appendices.
Related Concept Name: Fraxinus nigra - Liriodendron tulipifera - Acer rubrum / Caltha palustris - Carex bromoides Forest
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: Black Ash - American Elm - Red Maple: 39
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: Montane - Piedmont Basic Seepage Swamp
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.
Related Concept Name: Mountain / Piedmont Basic Seepage Swamp
Relationship: ? - Undetermined
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.

Ecological Systems Placement

Ecological Systems Placement
Ecological System Unique ID Ecological System Name
CES202.605 North-Central Interior and Appalachian Rich Swamp
CES202.609 Central Appalachian Stream and Riparian


NatureServe Conservation Status
Global Status: G3 (17Apr2000)
Rounded Global Status: G3 - Vulnerable
Reasons: This association has a narrow geographic range and is further limited by its small patch sizes and requirement for special, very localized wetlands. The type is confined to groundwater-saturated, base-rich habitats that are large enough to support forest vegetation.

Distribution
Color legend for Distribution Map
United States Distribution: DE, MD, NJ, PA, VA
Global Distribution: United States
Global Range: The probable range of this community encompasses the Central Appalachian region of Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Virginia, as well as Delaware and New Jersey. In Virginia, it is found primarily in the northern half of the mountains, apparently reaching its southern limits in Giles County. In Maryland, its distribution is centered in the Catoctin Mountains. The majority of occurrences are on the Northern Blue Ridge, but the type is also scattered in suitable habitats of the Ridge and Valley province, western Piedmont, and Maryland's Allegheny Plateau.

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: Northern Appalachian Piedmont Section
Section Code: 221D 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
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: Possible
Section Name: Blue Ridge Mountains Section
Section Code: M221D Occurrence Status: Confident or certain


Vegetation

Vegetation Summary: Overstory composition is mixed, with Acer rubrum, Fraxinus americana, and Liriodendron tulipifera the most abundant species. Fraxinus nigra is a frequent overstory associate but more abundant and sometimes dominant in the understory, along with young Acer rubrum and Fraxinus americana. With increasing elevation, Betula alleghaniensis becomes increasingly important, codominating most stands above 760 m (2500 feet) in Virginia and in the Catoctin Mountains of Maryland. Minor tree associates include Betula lenta and Tilia americana. Almost all trees in plot-sampled stands were <50 cm dbh and most were <40 cm dbh; but scattered Liriodendron specimens >80 cm dbh occur, and in one plot such an individual tree accounts for the high canopy cover of this species. Canopy closure is often incomplete (mean stratum cover = 60-80%), most evidently because of blowdowns. Very wet microhabitats that impede the establishment and firm rooting of trees may also contribute to a somewhat open canopy. Shrub stratum diversity is moderately high; Lindera benzoin is usually the most abundant species, and considerable stratum cover is contributed by tree saplings. Other frequently occurring true shrubs are Alnus serrulata, Carpinus caroliniana, Hamamelis virginiana, Ilex verticillata, and Sambucus nigra ssp. canadensis. Except in local areas where shrubs are dense, herbaceous cover is high (mean stratum cover = 90%). One or both of the early-maturing forbs Symplocarpus foetidus (mostly at lower elevations) and Veratrum viride are usually dominant over substantial areas. Because of microtopographic diversity, herbaceous patch-mosaics are typical in this vegetation. More-or-less constant, sometimes locally abundant species include Eurybia schreberi (= Aster schreberi), Caltha palustris, Carex bromoides, Carex gynandra, Carex prasina, Chelone glabra, Chrysosplenium americanum, Cinna arundinacea, Dryopteris carthusiana, Dryopteris goldiana, Glyceria striata, Impatiens capensis, Osmunda cinnamomea, Osmunda regalis var. spectabilis, Ranunculus recurvatus, Saxifraga pensylvanica, Packera aurea (= Senecio aureus), Sphenopholis pensylvanica, Thalictrum pubescens, and Viola cucullata. Moss cover is often significant, but only rarely includes Sphagnum spp. (not recorded in Virginia plots). Typical upland mesophytes commonly occur in well-drained hummock microhabitats and contribute to relatively high species richness values for this type of wetland (n = 60 taxa per 400 square meters for 25 plot samples).

Vegetation Composition (incomplete)
Species Name Rounded Global Status Growth Form Stratum Charact-
eristic
Dominant Constant
Cover Class %
Con-
stancy
%
Acer rubrum G3 Broad-leaved deciduous tree Tree canopy  
 
 
Fraxinus americana G3 Broad-leaved deciduous tree Tree canopy  
 
 
Fraxinus nigra G3 Broad-leaved deciduous tree Tree canopy    
 
 
Liriodendron tulipifera G3 Broad-leaved deciduous tree Tree canopy    
 
 
Fraxinus americana G3 Broad-leaved deciduous tree Tree subcanopy    
 
 
Fraxinus nigra G3 Broad-leaved deciduous tree Tree subcanopy    
 
 
Hamamelis virginiana G3 Broad-leaved deciduous tree Shrub/sapling (tall & short)    
 
 
Ilex verticillata G3 Broad-leaved deciduous tree Shrub/sapling (tall & short)    
 
 
Lindera benzoin G3 Broad-leaved deciduous tree Shrub/sapling (tall & short)  
 
 
Sambucus nigra ssp. canadensis G3 Broad-leaved deciduous shrub Shrub/sapling (tall & short)    
 
 
Vitis labrusca G3 Liana Shrub/sapling (tall & short)    
 
 
Rosa palustris G3 Dwarf-shrub Short shrub/sapling    
 
 
Aconitum reclinatum G3 Flowering forb Herb (field)      
 
 
Arisaema triphyllum G3 Flowering forb Herb (field)    
 
 
Caltha palustris G3 Flowering forb Herb (field)    
 
 
Cardamine pensylvanica G3 Flowering forb Herb (field)    
 
 
Chelone glabra G3 Flowering forb Herb (field)    
 
 
Chrysosplenium americanum G3 Flowering forb Herb (field)    
 
 
Euphorbia purpurea G3 Flowering forb Herb (field)      
 
 
Eurybia schreberi G3 Flowering forb Herb (field)    
 
 
Galium triflorum G3 Flowering forb Herb (field)    
 
 
Impatiens capensis G3 Flowering forb Herb (field)    
 
 
Micranthes micranthidifolia G3 Flowering forb Herb (field)    
 
 
Micranthes pensylvanica G3 Flowering forb Herb (field)    
 
 
Packera aurea G3 Flowering forb Herb (field)    
 
 
Platanthera grandiflora G3 Flowering forb Herb (field)      
 
 
Ranunculus hispidus var. caricetorum G3 Flowering forb Herb (field)    
 
 
Symphyotrichum praealtum var. angustior G3 Flowering forb Herb (field)      
 
 
Symplocarpus foetidus G3 Flowering forb Herb (field)  
 
 
Thalictrum pubescens G3 Flowering forb Herb (field)    
 
 
Trautvetteria caroliniensis G3 Flowering forb Herb (field)    
 
 
Trillium cernuum G3 Flowering forb Herb (field)    
 
 
Veratrum viride G3 Flowering forb Herb (field)  
 
 
Veronica americana G3 Flowering forb Herb (field)    
 
 
Veronica anagallis-aquatica G3 Flowering forb Herb (field)    
 
 
Viola cucullata G3 Flowering forb Herb (field)    
 
 
Athyrium filix-femina ssp. asplenioides G3 Fern (Spore-bearing forb) Herb (field)    
 
 
Dryopteris carthusiana G3 Fern (Spore-bearing forb) Herb (field)    
 
 
Dryopteris cristata G3 Fern (Spore-bearing forb) Herb (field)    
 
 
Huperzia lucidula G3 Fern (Spore-bearing forb) Herb (field)    
 
 
Onoclea sensibilis G3 Fern (Spore-bearing forb) Herb (field)    
 
 
Osmunda regalis var. spectabilis G3 Fern (Spore-bearing forb) Herb (field)    
 
 
Thelypteris noveboracensis G3 Fern (Spore-bearing forb) Herb (field)    
 
 
Carex bromoides G3 Graminoid Herb (field)    
 
 
Carex gynandra G3 Graminoid Herb (field)    
 
 
Carex laevivaginata G3 Graminoid Herb (field)    
 
 
Carex prasina G3 Graminoid Herb (field)    
 
 
Carex scabrata G3 Graminoid Herb (field)    
 
 
Carex scoparia G3 Graminoid Herb (field)    
 
 
Carex seorsa G3 Graminoid Herb (field)    
 
 
Cinna arundinacea G3 Graminoid Herb (field)    
 
 
Poa paludigena G3 Graminoid Herb (field)    
 
 
Sphenopholis pensylvanica G3 Graminoid Herb (field)    
 
 


At-Risk Species Reported for this Association
Scientific Name
  (Common Name)
NatureServe Global Status U.S. Endangered Species Act Status
Aconitum reclinatum
  (White Monkshood)
G3  
Euphorbia purpurea
  (Glade Spurge)
G3  
Poa paludigena
  (Bog Bluegrass)
G3  


Environmental Setting

Wetland Indicator: Y
Environmental Summary: This community occupies groundwater-saturated stream headwaters, large spring seeps and runs, and lateral areas in ravine and stream bottoms where groundwater emerges at the base of slopes. Hydrologically, these habitats are classified as "groundwater slope wetlands," where seepage discharged at the ground surface is drained away as streamflow (Golet et al. 1993). Habitats are usually more-or-less narrow and elongate, with considerable exposed bouldery and cobble alluvium. Soils are predominantly mineral, but local areas of organic muck sometimes accumulate in depressions. The ground surface is slightly sloping (mean slope = 3), and drainage is usually via small, intricately braided channels with intervening hummocks. Moss mats on boulders and cobble deposits commonly provide a rooting medium for herbaceous species, and "sedge tussocks" (especially of Carex bromoides and Carex prasina) are conspicuous features of these swamps. Soils collected from 25 Virginia and Maryland plot samples ranged from strongly acidic to neutral in pH, with moderately high calcium (mean = 1358 ppm) and magnesium (mean = 211 ppm) levels. This community is most frequent and best developed on Catoctin Formation metabasalt (greenstone) of the Northern Blue Ridge. There, it occurs locally in small patches (<12 ha [30 acres]) at elevations from about 275 to 850 m (900-2800 feet) and occasionally up to 975 m (3200 feet) (Ludwig et al. 1993). It has also been documented in northwestern Virginia in the Massanutten Mountains and western Ridge and Valley region, in the western Piedmont of both Virginia and Maryland and in Maryland's Allegheny Plateau in which stands observed and sampled occur at 800 m.. A somewhat isolated and disjunct occurrence is documented from the Dismal Creek valley in Giles County, in the southwestern Virginia Ridge and Valley. This is probably one of the southernmost occurrences for both the community type and Fraxinus nigra, a tree of pronounced northern distribution. The few known Ridge and Valley occurrences are associated with sites where Devonian or Silurian limestones are interbedded with sandstone and shale. While surficial outcrops of limestone are not evident at these sites, it is clear from both soil samples and floristic evidence that the wetlands are being supplied with calcium by groundwater.


Dynamic Processes


Plot Sampling & Classification Analysis

Plots stored in VegBank


Authors/Contributors
Concept Author(s): G.P. Fleming
Element Description Edition Date: 26Oct2011
Element Description Author(s): G.P. Fleming
NatureServe Conservation Status Factors Edition Date: 29May2007
NatureServe Conservation Status Factors Author(s): 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
  • Coxe, R. 2009. Guide to Delaware vegetation communities. Spring 2009 edition. State of Delaware, Division of Fish and Wildlife, Delaware Natural Heritage Program, Smyrna.

  • Ehrenfeld, J. G. 1977. Vegetation of Morristown National Historical Park: Ecological analysis and management alternatives. Final Report. USDI National Park Service Contract No. 1600-7-0004. 166 pp.

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

  • Fleming, G. P. 1999. Plant communities of limestone, dolomite, and other calcareous substrates in the George Washington and Jefferson national forests, Virginia. Natural Heritage Technical Report 99-4. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond. Unpublished report submitted to the USDA Forest Service. 218 pp. plus appendices.

  • 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., 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 K. Taverna. 2006. Vegetation classification for the National Capitol Region parks, western region. Regional (VA-WVA-MD-DC) analysis prepared for NatureServe and USGS-NPS Vegetation Mapping Program, March 2006. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond.

  • Fleming, G. P., and N. E. Van Alstine. 1999. Plant communities and floristic features of sinkhole ponds and seepage wetlands in southeastern Augusta County, Virginia. Banisteria 13:67-94.

  • 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.

  • Golet, F. C., A. J. K. Calhoun, W. R. DeRagon, D. J. Lowry, and A. J. Gold. 1993. Ecology of red maple swamps in the glaciated Northeast: A community profile. USDI Fish & Wildlife Service, Washington, DC. 151 pp.

  • Gould, A. M. A., and M. A. Berdine. 1998. Identification and protection of reference wetland natural communities in Maryland: Northern Piedmont and Blue Ridge circumneutral seepage swamps. The Biodiversity Program, Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Wildlife and Heritage Division, Annapolis. 77 pp. plus appendices.

  • 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.

  • Lea, C. 2003. Vegetation types in the National Capital Region Parks. Draft for review by NatureServe, Virginia Natural Heritage, West Virginia Natural Heritage, Maryland Natural Heritage, and National Park Service. March 2003. 140 pp.

  • Ludwig, J. D., G. P. Fleming, C. A. Pague, and T. J. Rawinski. 1993. A natural heritage inventory of mid-Atlantic region national parks in Virginia: Shenandoah National Park. Natural Heritage Technical Report 93-5. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond. 352 pp.

  • Sneddon, L., R. E. Zaremba, E. Largay, G. Podniesinski, S. Perles, and J. Thompson. 2008. Vegetation classification and mapping of Morristown National Historical Park, New Jersey. Technical Report NPS/NER/NRTR--2008/116. National Park Service, Philadelphia, PA. 162 pp. [http://biology.usgs.gov/npsveg/morr/morrrpt.pdf]

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

  • 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.

  • VDNH [Virginia Division of Natural Heritage]. No date. Unpublished data. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond.

  • Young, J., G. Fleming, P. Townsend, and J. Foster. 2006. Vegetation of Shenandoah National Park in relation to environmental gradients. Final Report (v.1.1). Research technical report prepared for USDI, National Park Service. USGS/NPS Vegetation Mapping Program. 92 pp. plus appendices.

  • Young, J., G. Fleming, P. Townsend, and J. Foster. 2007a. Vegetation of Shenandoah National Park in relation to environmental gradients. Final Report, volume 1.1. Unpublished report submitted to the U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service. 103 pp. plus appendices and GIS products.

  • Young, J., G. Fleming, W. Cass, and C. Lea. 2009. Vegetation of Shenandoah National Park in relation to environmental gradients, Version 2.0. Technical Report NPS/NER/NRTR--2009/142. National Park Service, Philadelphia, PA. 389 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