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 - Nyssa sylvatica / Ilex verticillata - Vaccinium fuscatum / Osmunda cinnamomea Seep Forest
Translated Name: Red Maple - Blackgum / Common Winterberry - Black Highbush Blueberry / Cinnamon Fern Seep Forest
Common Name: Central Appalachian Acidic Seepage Swamp Forest
Unique Identifier: CEGL007853
Classification Approach: International Vegetation Classification (IVC)
Summary: This community occurs on groundwater-saturated flats and low slopes along streams in the Ridge and Valley, northern Cumberland Plateau, Northern Blue Ridge, and western Piedmont at elevations of 200-900 m (700-2900 feet). Habitats are usually more-or-less narrow and elongate, with hummock-and-hollow microtopography, and frequently with a small ephemeral stream channel running through or adjacent to the community. Substrates are poorly drained mineral soils with numerous hydric indicators. The ground surface is slightly sloping, and drainage is usually via small, intricately braided channels with interspersed hummocks. The canopy is usually closed and consists of Acer rubrum, Nyssa sylvatica, and Liriodendron tulipifera. Quercus alba is an important associate in some areas, and Ulmus rubra, Fraxinus americana, and Platanus occidentalis are present in some stands. Minor or local tree species include Magnolia acuminata, Tsuga canadensis, Betula lenta, Pinus rigida, and Pinus strobus. The shrub stratum may be well-developed and includes Ilex verticillata, Ilex opaca, Vaccinium corymbosum, Kalmia latifolia, Alnus serrulata, Viburnum nudum var. cassinoides, Viburnum dentatum, Smilax spp., and, less consistently, Carpinus caroliniana, Asimina triloba, Euonymus americanus, Lindera benzoin, Gaylussacia frondosa, Gaylussacia baccata, Menziesia pilosa, Vaccinium fuscatum, Chionanthus virginicus, Viburnum nudum var. nudum, Rhododendron viscosum, and Toxicodendron vernix. Rubus hispidus is an abundant creeping vine in many stands. Typical herbaceous plants include Osmunda cinnamomea, Carex gynandra, Carex lurida, Carex atlantica, Carex debilis, Thelypteris noveboracensis, Platanthera clavellata, Chelone glabra, Medeola virginiana, Dioscorea quaternata, Juncus effusus, Lycopus uniflorus, Lycopodium obscurum, Osmunda regalis var. spectabilis, Symplocarpus foetidus, Veratrum viride, Viola hastata, and Viola cucullata.



Classification

Classification Confidence: High
Classification Comments: Examples occur near the Maple Flats pond complex (Augusta County, Virginia). This community is also known from Massanutten Mountain (Lee District, George Washington National Forest), elsewhere along the foot of the Blue Ridge (north of Maple Flats), a site on the northern Blue Ridge in Loudoun County, Virginia (owned by The Appalachian Trail Club), and in the Bull Run Mountains of Virginia, an isolated Piedmont foothill in Fauquier and Prince William counties, Virginia; occurrences in the latter two areas do not have Pinus rigida (or much of it) but are otherwise very similar (Fleming 1998). Quantitative analysis of a 1300-plot regional dataset for the National Capital Region Parks Vegetation Mapping Project Phase I indicate that a portion of Gould and Berdine's (1998) "circumneutral" seepage swamp community from Catoctin Mountain, Maryland, also corresponds to this type. It has also been sampled in West Virginia, where occurrences generally lack a dense shrub layer and are characterized by heavy fern cover.

There are unresolved issues regarding conceptual overlap between this type and Acer rubrum - Nyssa sylvatica High Allegheny Plateau-Central Appalachian Seep Forest (CEGL006132). The latter type is a broadly defined community type that encompasses both seepage wetlands and poorly drained depressions. The community classified and described here for Virginia is limited conceptually to flow-through, groundwater-seepage wetlands. Communities with similar Acer - Nyssa canopies but occurring in saturated to seasonally flooded depression wetlands without apparent seepage inputs have been documented in Virginia but are not treated due to insufficient data. Nevertheless, they appear to warrant segregation from the seepage wetland communities because of their hydrologic regime, distinctly different herbaceous composition, and much lower species richness.

This type is currently under-represented by plot data, but observations suggest that it is relatively consistent in its composition and environmental affiliations. However, community characterization and nomenclature are subject to change pending further data collection and analysis, ideally based on wider geographic sampling. The recognition of segregate associations, subassociations, or variants may also be warranted following additional assessment. Lower-elevation sites are characterized by Amianthium muscitoxicum, Brachyelytrum erectum, Carex debilis, Carex intumescens, Cypripedium acaule, Gaylussacia frondosa, Lindera benzoin, Platanthera ciliaris, Platanthera clavellata, Uvularia sessilifolia, Viburnum nudum var. nudum, and Viola x primulifolia. Middle-elevation sites are characterized by Oclemena acuminata (= Aster acuminatus), Betula lenta, Magnolia acuminata, Pinus strobus, Rhododendron catawbiense, and Rhododendron viscosum. A single site (Magnolia Swamp), possibly with boggier or more organic soils, is characterized by Magnolia virginiana, Arethusa bulbosa, Dulichium arundinaceum, Juncus effusus, Parthenocissus quinquefolia, Triadenum virginicum, and Woodwardia areolata.

This type is similar in many respects to, and intergrades with, Montane Basic Seepage Swamps that are situated on calcareous soils derived from metabasalt (greenstone) and carbonate rock substrates [see Acer rubrum - Fraxinus nigra - Betula alleghaniensis / Veratrum viride - Carex bromoides Seep Forest (CEGL008416)]. These environmentally disparate swamps share a surprising number of prominent species including Acer rubrum, Symplocarpus foetidus, Veratrum viride, Osmunda cinnamomea, Osmunda regalis var. spectabilis, Carex leptalea, etc. Acidic seepage swamps, however, have lower species richness and mostly lack distinctly base-loving species such as Fraxinus americana, Fraxinus nigra, Caltha palustris, Carex bromoides, Saxifraga pensylvanica, etc. Sphagnum mosses, as well as many vascular plants that characterize Acidic Seepage Swamps, are absent or unimportant in the calcareous swamps. Examples include Pinus rigida, Nyssa sylvatica, Viburnum nudum, Parnassia asarifolia, Platanthera ciliaris, Platanthera clavellata, Rubus hispidus, Lycopodium obscurum, Carex debilis, and Carex folliculata (Fleming and Van Alstine 1999).

Formerly a common canopy tree of this community type in certain localities (e.g., Maple Flats, Augusta County), Pinus rigida has been nearly eliminated from many stands by a recent outbreak of southern pine beetles (Dendroctonus frontalis).


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 Central Hardwood Swamp Forest
Group Central Interior-Appalachian Seepage Swamp
Alliance Appalachian-Piedmont Red Maple - Blackgum Seepage Forest

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

Similar Associations
Unique Identifier Name
CEGL004426 Acer rubrum var. trilobum / Viburnum nudum var. nudum / Osmunda cinnamomea - Saururus cernuus - Impatiens capensis Seep Forest
CEGL006132 Acer rubrum - Nyssa sylvatica High Allegheny Plateau-Central Appalachian Seep Forest
CEGL006238 Acer rubrum - Nyssa sylvatica - Magnolia virginiana / Viburnum nudum var. nudum / Osmunda cinnamomea Swamp Forest
CEGL008416 Acer rubrum - Fraxinus nigra - Betula alleghaniensis / Veratrum viride - Carex bromoides 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
West Virginia Acer rubrum - Nyssa sylvatica / Ilex verticillata - Vaccinium fuscatum / Osmunda cinnamomea Forest Equivalent Certain WVNHP unpubl. data


Other Related Concepts
Related Concept Name: Acer rubrum - Fraxinus pennsylvanica - Betula (alleghaniensis, lenta) / Ilex verticillata / Symplocarpus foetidus Forest
Relationship: I - Intersecting
Reference: 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.
Related Concept Name: Acer rubrum - Liriodendron tulipifera / Ilex verticillata - Vaccinium fuscatum / Osmunda cinnamomea - Symplocarpus foetidus Forest
Relationship: = - Equivalent
Reference: Fleming, G. P. 2002a. Ecological communities of the Bull Run Mountains, Virginia: Baseline vegetation and floristic data for conservation planning and natural area stewardship. Natural Heritage Technical Report 02-12. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond. 274 pp. plus appendices.
Relationship: = - Equivalent
Reference: Fleming, G. P. 2002b. Preliminary classification of Piedmont & Inner Coastal Plain vegetation types in Virginia. Natural Heritage Technical Report 02-14. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond. 29 pp.
Related Concept Name: Acer rubrum - Nyssa sylvatica - Pinus rigida / Ilex verticillata / Osmunda cinnamomea community
Relationship: ? - Undetermined
Reference: 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.
Related Concept Name: Acer rubrum - Nyssa sylvatica / Vaccinium (corymbosum, fuscatum) / Osmunda cinnamomea 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 - Nyssa sylvatica / Vaccinium fuscatum - Ilex verticillata / Osmunda cinnamomea 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 / Thelypteris noveboracensis forest seep
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: Montane - Piedmont Acidic 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 Acidic 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
CES202.604 North-Central Appalachian Acidic Swamp
CES202.609 Central Appalachian Stream and Riparian


NatureServe Conservation Status
Global Status: G2 (14Feb2012)
Rounded Global Status: G2 - Imperiled
Reasons: This association has a narrow geographic range and is further limited by its requirement for special, localized wetlands. The type is confined to groundwater-saturated, nutrient-poor habitats that are large enough to support forest vegetation. February 2012: Two issues regarding the global rank have emerged since the analysis of this type using the rank calculator in 2008. The calculator produced a rank of G1. The rank of G1Q was assigned based on the taxonomic overlap with other associations of the alliance, especially Acer rubrum - Nyssa sylvatica High Allegheny Plateau-Central Appalachian Seep Forest (CEGL006132). However, after further discussion with ecologists in the Virginia Division of Natural Heritage, the suggested assigned rank is G2. This type occurs naturally in small patches, so that even a moderately large number of occurrences yields a low area of occupancy. The rank calculator assigns an automatic G1 for areas of occupancy <250 sq km regardless of the number of occurrences. The taxonomic status of the type is felt to be robust because its classification was the result of a regional analysis conducted for the vegetation classification and mapping of the National Capital Region parks.

Distribution
Color legend for Distribution Map
United States Distribution: MD, NC, PApotentially occurs, VA, WV
Global Distribution: United States
Global Range: The documented range of this community type encompasses the Central Appalachians of Maryland and Virginia, and the Cumberland Mountains in West Virginia. In Virginia, it is scattered throughout the mountains (Northern Blue Ridge) and, more locally, the western Piedmont (Allard and Leonard 1943).

U.S. Forest Service Ecoregions
Domain Name: Humid Temperate Domain
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: 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: This forest association has an open to closed canopy of Acer rubrum, Nyssa sylvatica, and Liriodendron tulipifera. Quercus alba is an important associate in some areas, and Ulmus rubra, Fraxinus americana, and Platanus occidentalis are present in some stands. Pinus rigida is a frequent overstory associate in some Ridge and Valley and Blue Ridge stands, although its numbers have been recently reduced by southern pine beetle outbreaks. Minor tree species, especially at the higher elevations, include Magnolia acuminata, Tsuga canadensis, Betula lenta, and Pinus strobus. A single, anomalous stand in Augusta County, Virginia, contains an abundance of the disjunct Coastal Plain tree Magnolia virginiana (Carr 1939). Amelanchier arborea is usually common in the understory, along with reproduction of Acer rubrum and Nyssa sylvatica. The shrub stratum is often well-developed and includes Ilex verticillata, Ilex opaca, Kalmia latifolia, Alnus serrulata, Viburnum dentatum, Photinia pyrifolia (= Aronia arbutifolia), Vaccinium corymbosum, and Smilax spp. Less frequent, but locally important, shrubs include Asimina triloba, Vaccinium fuscatum, Euonymus americanus, Toxicodendron vernix, Viburnum nudum var. nudum, Viburnum nudum var. cassinoides, Menziesia pilosa, Carpinus caroliniana, Chionanthus virginicus, Lindera benzoin, Gaylussacia frondosa, Rhododendron catawbiense, Rhododendron periclymenoides, and Rhododendron viscosum. Rubus hispidus is an abundant creeping vine in many stands; Smilax rotundifolia may also be present. The most characteristic herbaceous plants are Osmunda cinnamomea, Osmunda regalis var. spectabilis, Platanthera clavellata, Chelone glabra, Rubus hispidus, Viola cucullata, Carex gynandra, Carex lurida, Carex atlantica, Carex debilis, Oxypolis rigidior, Thelypteris noveboracensis, Athyrium filix-femina, Dioscorea quaternata, Juncus effusus, Lycopus uniflorus, Medeola virginiana, Polystichum acrostichoides, Potentilla simplex, and Viola hastata. Where shrubs are sparse, as in most of the West Virginia occurrences, fern cover is typically extensive. Less frequent but typical herbs include Parnassia asarifolia, Carex intumescens, Carex leptalea, Symplocarpus foetidus, Veratrum viride, Maianthemum canadense, Lycopodium obscurum, Onoclea sensibilis, Leersia virginica, Boehmeria cylindrica, Lycopus virginicus, Glyceria striata, and Dryopteris cristata. Many additional herbaceous species, including several more typical of uplands, occur at low constancy and cover. The bryophyte layer may also be diverse; species of mosses and liverworts identified from plots include Atrichum undulatum, Aulacomnium palustre, Bryhnia novae-angliae, Callicladium haldanianum, Campylium radicale, Dicranum scoparium, Hypnum imponens, Jungermannia gracillima, Leucobryum albidum, Mnium hornum, Pellia epiphylla, Plagiomnium ciliare, Platygyrium repens, Steerecleus serrulatus, and Thuidium delicatulum. Mean vascular plant species richness of 37 plot-sampled stands in Virginia and West Virginia is 47 taxa per 400 square meters.

Vegetation Composition (incomplete)
Species Name Rounded Global Status Growth Form Stratum Charact-
eristic
Dominant Constant
Cover Class %
Con-
stancy
%
Acer rubrum G2 Broad-leaved deciduous tree Tree canopy  
 
 
Liriodendron tulipifera G2 Broad-leaved deciduous tree Tree canopy  
 
 
Nyssa sylvatica G2 Broad-leaved deciduous tree Tree canopy  
 
 
Quercus alba G2 Broad-leaved deciduous tree Tree canopy    
 
 
Ilex verticillata G2 Broad-leaved deciduous tree Shrub/sapling (tall & short)    
 
 
Alnus serrulata G2 Broad-leaved deciduous shrub Shrub/sapling (tall & short)    
 
 
Rubus hispidus G2 Broad-leaved deciduous shrub Short shrub/sapling    
 
 
Chelone glabra G2 Flowering forb Herb (field)    
 
 
Eriocaulon decangulare G2 Flowering forb Herb (field)      
 
 
Helonias bullata G2 Flowering forb Herb (field)      
 
 
Lycopus uniflorus G2 Flowering forb Herb (field)    
 
 
Oxypolis rigidior G2 Flowering forb Herb (field)    
 
 
Platanthera clavellata G2 Flowering forb Herb (field)    
 
 
Viola cucullata G2 Flowering forb Herb (field)  
 
 
Osmunda cinnamomea G2 Fern (Spore-bearing forb) Herb (field)    
 
 
Thelypteris noveboracensis G2 Fern (Spore-bearing forb) Herb (field)  
 
 
Carex baileyi G2 Graminoid Herb (field)    
 
 
Carex debilis G2 Graminoid Herb (field)    
 
 
Carex folliculata G2 Graminoid Herb (field)    
 
 
Carex intumescens G2 Graminoid Herb (field)    
 
 
Carex prasina G2 Graminoid Herb (field)    
 
 
Cinna arundinacea G2 Graminoid Herb (field)    
 
 
Dichanthelium dichotomum G2 Graminoid Herb (field)    
 
 
Glyceria melicaria G2 Graminoid Herb (field)    
 
 
Glyceria striata G2 Graminoid Herb (field)    
 
 
Juncus effusus G2 Graminoid Herb (field)    
 
 
Pellia epiphylla G2 Liverwort/hornwort Nonvascular    
 
 
Aulacomnium palustre G2 Moss Nonvascular    
 
 
Bryhnia novae-angliae G2 Moss Nonvascular    
 
 
Callicladium haldanianum G2 Moss Nonvascular    
 
 
Campylium radicale G2 Moss Nonvascular    
 
 
Mnium hornum G2 Moss Nonvascular    
 
 
Plagiomnium ciliare G2 Moss Nonvascular    
 
 


At-Risk Species Reported for this Association
Scientific Name
  (Common Name)
NatureServe Global Status U.S. Endangered Species Act Status
Helonias bullata
  (Swamp-pink)
G3 LT: Listed threatened


Environmental Setting

Wetland Indicator: Y
Environmental Summary: This community occurs on groundwater-saturated flats along low- to middle-elevation streams and headwaters seeps in areas underlain by acidic sedimentary and metamorphic rocks. It is a small-patch type that is particularly frequent and well-developed in the large alluvial fans along the western foot of the Northern Blue Ridge and in small-stream valleys and low-gradient plateau drainages of the Ridge and Valley province and parts of the Cumberland Plateau. Outliers occur throughout the western Piedmont, particularly in districts underlain by acidic metasedimentary rocks. Habitats are usually more-or-less narrow and elongate, with hummock-and-hollow microtopography, and frequently with a small ephemeral stream channel running through or adjacent to the community. Substrates are poorly drained mineral soils with numerous hydric indicators, including saturated horizons, oxidized root channels, low chroma, gley, and mottles. Local areas of organic muck sometimes accumulate in depressions. The ground surface is slightly sloping, and drainage is usually via small, intricately braided channels with interspersed hummocks. Moss mats, predominantly of Sphagnum spp., are usually abundant and provide a rooting medium for herbaceous species. Soils collected from plot samples are very strongly acidic with moderately low to very low base status. Patches of this community are mostly shaded by overhanging trees, but sunny spots may be created by canopy gaps, and larger patches may have small open centers.


Dynamic Processes


Plot Sampling & Classification Analysis

Plots stored in VegBank


Authors/Contributors
Concept Author(s): G.P. Fleming and P. Coulling (2001)
Element Description Edition Date: 02Apr2010
Element Description Author(s): G. Fleming, P. Coulling, S.C. Gawler
NatureServe Conservation Status Factors Edition Date: 14Feb2012
NatureServe Conservation Status Factors Author(s): L.A. Sneddon

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


References
  • Allard, H. A., and E. C. Leonard. 1943. The vegetation and floristics of Bull Run Mountain, Virginia. Castanea 8:1-64.

  • Carr, L. G. 1939. Some notes on the ecology of plants of Magnolia Swamp, August County, Virginia. Claytonia 5:37-47.

  • Fleming, G. P. 1998. Virginia natural community framework, version January 30, 1998. Unpublished document. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond. 6 pp.

  • Fleming, G. P. 2002a. Ecological communities of the Bull Run Mountains, Virginia: Baseline vegetation and floristic data for conservation planning and natural area stewardship. Natural Heritage Technical Report 02-12. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond. 274 pp. plus appendices.

  • Fleming, G. P. 2002b. Preliminary classification of Piedmont & Inner Coastal Plain vegetation types in Virginia. Natural Heritage Technical Report 02-14. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond. 29 pp.

  • 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. 2003. Preliminary vegetation classification for the National Capitol Region parks. Regional (VA-WVA-MD-DC) analysis prepared for NatureServe and USGS-NPS Vegetation Mapping Program, March 2003. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond.

  • 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 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.

  • Fleming, Gary P. Personal communication. Ecologist, Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond, VA.

  • 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., 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.

  • 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.

  • 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, Z. Arcaro, and S. C. Gawler. 2010. Vegetation classification and mapping at Gauley River National Recreation Area. Technical Report NPS/NER/NRTR--2010/148. 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.

  • 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