Euphorbia purpurea - (Raf.) Fern.
Glade Spurge
Other English Common Names: Darlington's Glade Spurge
Other Common Names: Darlington's glade spurge
Taxonomic Status: Accepted
Related ITIS Name(s): Euphorbia purpurea (Raf.) Fern. (TSN 28126)
Unique Identifier: ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.159702
Element Code: PDEUP0Q1T0
Informal Taxonomy: Plants, Vascular - Flowering Plants - Spurge Family
Image 10414

© Alfred R. Schotz

Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family Genus
Plantae Anthophyta Dicotyledoneae Euphorbiales Euphorbiaceae Euphorbia
Check this box to expand all report sections:
Concept Reference
Concept Reference: Kartesz, J.T. 1994. A synonymized checklist of the vascular flora of the United States, Canada, and Greenland. 2nd edition. 2 vols. Timber Press, Portland, OR.
Concept Reference Code: B94KAR01HQUS
Name Used in Concept Reference: Euphorbia purpurea
Conservation Status

NatureServe Status

Global Status: G3
Global Status Last Reviewed: 02Mar2018
Global Status Last Changed: 16Nov1992
Ranking Methodology Used: Ranked by calculator
Rounded Global Status: G3 - Vulnerable
Reasons: Euphorbia purpurea is known from approximately 67 extant occurrences in nine states (North Carolina, Virginia, West Virginia, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Delaware, New Jersey, Ohio, and Georgia). It is primarily an eastern Appalachian forest species but does occur in other regions including on the coastal plain. Threats to this species include logging activities, invasive weeds, recreational activities, succession of sites, deer browse, and road development and maintenance.
Nation: United States
National Status: N3

U.S. & Canada State/Province Status
Due to latency between updates made in state, provincial or other NatureServe Network databases and when they appear on NatureServe Explorer, for state or provincial information you may wish to contact the data steward in your jurisdiction to obtain the most current data. Please refer to our Distribution Data Sources to find contact information for your jurisdiction.
United States Delaware (S1), Georgia (S1), Maryland (S1), New Jersey (S1), North Carolina (S3), Ohio (S1), Pennsylvania (S1), Virginia (S2), West Virginia (S2)

Other Statuses

NatureServe Global Conservation Status Factors

Range Extent Comments: This species occurs in nine states in the eastern United States (North Carolina, Virginia, West Virginia, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Delaware, New Jersey, Ohio, and Georgia). The species is most prevalently found within the Appalachian Mountains on upland sites (Knoop, 1990). Several sites were historically known from the Coastal Piedmont Province.

Area of Occupancy: 26-125 4-km2 grid cells
Area of Occupancy Comments:  

Number of Occurrences: 21 - 80
Number of Occurrences Comments: There are about 67 occurrences rangewide: Delaware (1 extant), Georgia (1 extant), Pennsylvania (10 extant, 9 historic, and 3 extirpated), Virginia (12 extant and 2 historic), North Carolina (about 20 extant and 3 historic), West Virginia (15 extant and 1 historic), New Jersey (1 extant and 3 historic), Ohio (1 extant), and Maryland (6 extant and 6 historic). Presumed extirpated in Alabama.

Population Size Comments: Individuals may be difficult to distinguish from each other and individuals form clumps which may produce numerous stalks. It is difficult to estimate the global population size as counts vary between number of stems and clumps or with neither distinguished, the year of the count varies over twenty or more years, and not all occurrences have counts of any kind. It is possible based on the available counts that there are over 20,000 plants but this is based on data with the challenges listed above.

Number of Occurrences with Good Viability/Integrity: Some (13-40)

Overall Threat Impact: High - medium
Overall Threat Impact Comments: This species is currently most threatened by logging activities, invasive weeds, recreational activities (hiking, biking, ORV, horseback riding), succession of sites, deer browse, and road development and maintenance. Additional threats include draining and filling of wetland areas, grazing, fallen trees from utility clearing activities, quarry development and maintenance, extreme weather (drought or flooding), and development. This species appears to favor some disturbance and therefore logging may have some benefits but more research is needed to determine the relationship. Logging still poses a threat by causing physical disturbances to soil and habitat (Rawinski & Cassin 1986). In the past, draining and filling of wetland areas were the primary threats to this species (Knoop, 1990; Rawinski & Cassin, 1986; Snyder, 1986a). In high-altitude pastures above 3,000 feet, grazing has selected for E. purpurea by reducing competition from other more palatable plant species (Bartgis pers. comm.). Although moderate grazing does not appear to harm the species, extensive overgrazing may prove to be detrimental (T. Smith pers. comm.; Rawinski & Cassin, 1986) but this appears to be an active threat at only one site as of 2018. Historic sites in eastern Pennsylvania have been destroyed through intensive grazing (T. Smith pers. comm.). Euphorbia purpurea may require maintenance of the integrity of the seepage habitat in which it lives for survival (Ludwig pers. comm.).

Short-term Trend: Decline of 10-30%
Short-term Trend Comments: Never apparently common, but destruction of habitat has resulted in declines over the last two centuries.

Intrinsic Vulnerability Comments: Appears to be resistant to moderate levels of disturbance in some situations. Walking through a population, or even mild grazing does not seem to damage populations.

Other NatureServe Conservation Status Information

Global Range: This species occurs in nine states in the eastern United States (North Carolina, Virginia, West Virginia, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Delaware, New Jersey, Ohio, and Georgia). The species is most prevalently found within the Appalachian Mountains on upland sites (Knoop, 1990). Several sites were historically known from the Coastal Piedmont Province.

U.S. States and Canadian Provinces

Due to latency between updates made in state, provincial or other NatureServe Network databases and when they appear on NatureServe Explorer, for state or provincial information you may wish to contact the data steward in your jurisdiction to obtain the most current data. Please refer to our Distribution Data Sources to find contact information for your jurisdiction.
Color legend for Distribution Map

U.S. & Canada State/Province Distribution
United States DE, GA, MD, NC, NJ, OH, PA, VA, WV

Range Map
No map available.

U.S. Distribution by County Help
State County Name (FIPS Code)
DE Kent (10001)
GA Towns (13281)
MD Baltimore (city) (24510)*, Baltimore County (24005)*, Carroll (24013)*, Cecil (24015), Frederick (24021), Harford (24025)
NC Ashe (37009), Buncombe (37021), Clay (37043), Graham (37075), Haywood (37087), Jackson (37099), Macon (37113), Madison (37115), Swain (37173), Yancey (37199)
NJ Cape May (34009), Salem (34033)*
OH Pike (39131)
PA Centre (42027)*, Chester (42029), Cumberland (42041), Franklin (42055)*, Fulton (42057), Lancaster (42071), Perry (42099), York (42133)
VA Bedford (51019), Floyd (51063), Grayson (51077), Greene (51079), Montgomery (51121), Page (51139), Rockbridge (51163), Russell (51167), Tazewell (51185), Washington (51191)*
WV Greenbrier (54025), Pendleton (54071)*, Pocahontas (54075), Preston (54077), Randolph (54083), Tucker (54093)
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
U.S. Distribution by Watershed Help
Watershed Region Help Watershed Name (Watershed Code)
02 Brandywine-Christina (02040205)+*, Cohansey-Maurice (02040206)+, Broadkill-Smyrna (02040207)+, Great Egg Harbor (02040302)+*, Upper West Branch Susquehanna (02050201)+*, Bald Eagle (02050204)+*, Lower Susquehanna-Penns (02050301)+*, Upper Juniata (02050302)+*, Lower Juniata (02050304)+, Lower Susquehanna-Swatara (02050305)+, Lower Susquehanna (02050306)+, Chester-Sassafras (02060002)+, Gunpowder-Patapsco (02060003)+*, South Branch Potomac (02070001)+*, Conococheague-Opequon (02070004)+*, South Fork Shenandoah (02070005)+, Middle Potomac-Catoctin (02070008)+, Monocacy (02070009)+, Rapidan-Upper Rappahannock (02080103)+, Upper James (02080201)+
03 Upper Roanoke (03010101)+
05 Cheat (05020004)+, Youghiogheny (05020006)+, Upper New (05050001)+, Greenbrier (05050003)+, Gauley (05050005)+, Ohio Brush-Whiteoak (05090201)+
06 North Fork Holston (06010101)+*, Upper French Broad (06010105)+, Pigeon (06010106)+, Nolichucky (06010108)+, Upper Little Tennessee (06010202)+, Tuckasegee (06010203)+, Lower Little Tennessee (06010204)+, Upper Clinch (06010205)+, Hiwassee (06020002)+
+ Natural heritage record(s) exist for this watershed
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
Ecology & Life History
Basic Description: Stout perennial plant to 1 m tall, from a short stout rhizome; cauline leaves elliptic to narrowly lance-oblong, those subtending the umbel smaller and broader, commonly ovate; leaves of the umbel depressed-ovate to reniform, involucres 3 mm, glabrous, often purplish above. Referring to the species in Ohio, Knoop (1990) stated "...According to Core (1966), the taxon is named after the petaliod segments of the cyathium which are purplish above. This feature, from my experience, is not easily recognized."
Ecology Comments: Darlington's spurge typically flowers from May to June (Gleason and Cronquist 1963).

Euphorbia purpurea can apparently be propagated quite easily through seed germination or cuttings (Brumback pers. comm.). Seeds will germinate without a pre-treatment of moist and cold, but germination appears somewhat erratic. All (100%) of E. purpurea cuttings taken in early July from plants growing in a botanical garden rooted (Brumback pers. comm.).

Palustrine Habitat(s): FORESTED WETLAND
Terrestrial Habitat(s): Forest/Woodland, Grassland/herbaceous
Habitat Comments: Dry or moist woods, rare (Gleason & Conquist, 1991) (G & C); mountain glades and swampy woods (Strausbaugh and Core, 1977) (S & C); a unified hydrologic setting, primarily ground water influenced, headwater wetlands (seepage swamps, spring swamps); groundwater discharge maintains perennially saturated soil environment which is never (or rarely) inundated by flooding. Occurs most commonly in seepage swamps or spring seeps at the headwaters of streams of creeks (Rawinski and Cassin, 1986). This description typifies some of the habitats found in New Jersey (Snyder, 1986b), West Virginia, Pennsylvania (Bier pers. comm., T. Smith pers. comm.), Virginia, Massachusetts (Bartgis, pers. comm.) and North Carolina (Rawinski & Cassin, 1986). Such habitats are perennially saturated due to a continual discharge of groundwater (Knoop, 1990), but are never (or rarely) flooded (Rawinski & Cassin, 1986). Within such seepage swamps, associates include Polemonium vanbruntiae, Carex mitchelliana, C. leptalea, Chrysosplenium americanum, Glyceria striata, Cirsium muticum, Rhamnus alnifolia, Scirpus rubrotinctus, Triadenum walteri and Penthorum sedoides (Rawinski & Cassin, 1986). Occasionally, however E. purpurea is found in non-moist conditions, reflecting the fact that the species is not an obligate hydrophile (Knoop, 1990; Rawinski & Cassin, 1986). The original description of the species by Rafinesque listed the habitat as the glades of the Pennsylvania Allegheny Mountains (Fernald, 1932). Approximately 25% of the known sites are not in wetland habitats, but include such habitats as white oak forest formed over hornblend and open pastures underlain by limestone (Knoop, 1990; Rawinski & Cassin, 1986). On pastured sites cattle conspicuously avoid eating Euphorbia and the species consequently flourishes (Rawinski & Cassin, 1986). Darlington's spurge (Euphorbia darlingtonii) can tolerate a wide range of light conditions, ranging from full sunlight of pastures to shaded forest floors (Rawinski & Cassin, 1986). In Ohio, a single population of glade spurge occurs on a steep, north-facing slope in the shade of a massive outcropping of ??? dolomite (Knoop, 1990). This population occurs in a moist, dolomitic soil within a mixed hardwood forest (Ohio Heritage Program, 1987) and numbers roughly 75 individuals (Knoop, 1990). The soil, roughly 25-45 cm in thickness, is typically dry at the top of the rock outcropping and mesic near its base. The mixed decidous forest community is dominated by Quercus muhlenbergii, Fraxinus quadrangulata, Cenchrus occidentalis, Viburnum prunifolium, Quercus rubra and Hydrangea arborescens (Knoop, 1990). Herbaceous associates include Aquilegia canadensis, Thalictrum dioicum, Carex eburnea, Impatiens pallida and Phlox divericata. Two sub-populations of the single extant New Jersey occurrences are located in open, mucky seepage areas adjacent to a small stream running through a rich, wooded coastal swamp (Snyder, 1986a, 1986b). Associates include Sphenoholis pensylvanica, Carex mitchelliana, Caltha palustris, Chrysosplenium americanum, Viola conspersa and Cirsium muticum (Snyder, 1986b). In Virginia, E. purpurea is known from four sites, occurring on lower slopes and floodplains in scattered colonies and a single high-altitude site at the crest of Russell Beartown Mountain (Ogle, 1989). Associates at low-elevation sites include Polemonium reptans, Microstegium vineum, Roripa palustris, Elephantopus carolinianus, Ranunculus repens and R. arborvitis. Pennsylvania populations of E. purpurea occur in both the eastern and western portions of the state. A single extant western population occurs in a seepage swamp along an intermontane valley stream (Bier pers. comm.). These oblong wetlands run parallel with the stream with seepage water slowly running through them. Associates include Symplocarpus feotidus, Alnus spp., Impatiens spp., Lendera benzoin (Bier pers. comm.). Four extant populations occur in eastern Pennsylvania. One eastern population occurs on a serpentine barren at the base of a slope along an intermittent stream (T. Smith pers. comm.; Rawinski & Cassin, 1986). A York County population occurs in much soil at the edge of a seepage hillside. The site is dominated by Symplocarpus foetidus (90% cover) with an overstory of Acer rubrum (T. Smith pers. comm.). The other two sites are large seepage swamps with small streams running through them. Associates include Acer rubrum, Fraxinus spp. and Quercus spp. In Maryland, E. purpurea occurs typically in seepage wetlands (shrub swamps) over greenstone (Bartgis pers. comm.). Associates in such habitats include arrow-wood, Alnus spp., swamp-pink, climbing fern and skunk cabbage. At one site along the Piedmont/Coastal Plain border, E. purpurea occurs on a sandy deposit. This site may occur on the coastal plain, a situation unique in the state. Associates are similar to those over greenstone. At all sites, canopies are relatively open (Bartgis pers. comm.). In West Virginia, Darlington's spurge (Euphorbia darlingtonii) occurs in habitats varying from seepage swamps to high-elevation, dry, upland pastures over limestone to cirumneutral alluviam along high-elevation rivers (Bartgis pers. comm.). Seepage swamp associates include Alnus spp., Rhamnus alnifolia and Polemonium vanbruntinae. Upland pasture associates include Poa pratensis and other pasture plants. In this habitat, E. purpurea has been found in extremely large numbers (in excess of 10,000 individuals) at one site (Bartgis pers. comm.)and is often looked upon as a weed by farmers. Cattle apparently select for E. purpurea by eating other competing forbs and grasses and by refusing to eat the poor-tasting spurge. At such dry, high-elevation sites, plants appear to thrive due to the frequent presence of fog and rainfall. At one other site, E. purpurea occurs on alluvium along a high-elevation river with small canopy breaks, where past river action has formed small depressions. Ostrich fern is an associate at these sites.
Economic Attributes Not yet assessed
Management Summary
Stewardship Overview: Monitoring needs include tracking population trends through periodic counts of individual stems and flowers per stem, and estimates of seed production and viability and seedling development success. Water quality in seep habitat and tracking of adjacent land use are additional needs. Research should be centered on life-history aspects of the species, surveys of potential habitat and management options of glade populations. Management needs include the maintenance of the hydrological integrity of seep habitats, maintenance of openings, removal of exotic vegetation, and proper management of grazed pastures for E. purpurea. Several occurrences on private land are in close proximity to national forest and these should be brought to the attention of the FS. Other occurrences would be benefit from a conservation easement.
Restoration Potential: Research at the New England Wildflower Society has shown that the species can be propagated from both seeds and cuttings (Brumback pers. comm.). Cuttings taken in early June from plants growing in the botanical garden rooted 100% of the time. Seeds were shown to germinate without a pre-treatment of moist, cold conditions, but germination was erratic (Brumback pers. comm.).
Preserve Selection & Design Considerations: Land protection is dependent upon the habitat in which E. purpurea occurs. In seeps or seepage swamp habitats, protection must take into account the source of the water feeding the habitat. Hydrologists should be consulted to determine how much land area is feeding the seep. Similar protection strategies should be followed for populations in floodplain depressions, but in such habitats, protection may be very difficult due to the ephemeral nature of the habitat. In pasture/glade habitats, protection effort should encompass the existing populations and existing potential habitat within the immediate area in order to allow for expansion. In all habitats, adjacent buffer lands should also be protected as a buffer against outside influences.
Management Requirements: Management needs should include the maintenance of hydrological integrity within sites containing E. purpurea (Ludwig pers. comm.). This is particularly important for populations within seeps or seepage swamp habitats. There is some concern that natural open areas in a New Jersey swamp may have to be artificially maintained in order to maintain suitable habitat for the species (Snyder pers. comm.). At still other sites, management of exotic vegetation is a necessary management issue (Ludwig pers. comm.).

At sites located in pastures, management of the grazing herd should be sought to best benefit the E. purpurea population. Moderate levels of grazing in a high-altitude pasture in West Virginia apparently has benefited the species (Bartgis pers. comm.), while intensive grazing in Pennsylvania has apparently destroyed historic populations (Smith pers. comm.). L. Smith (pers. comm.) observed light deer browsing on plants in Ohio, but it is not thought that management for this is needed.

If at all possible, the quality of ground water flow through seeps must be maintained. Quality may be maintained through acquisition of upland acres, conservation easement or other means.

Grazing should be halted or managed at low levels in glade-type habitats in order to minimize damage to plants or the habitat. Glades were likely maintained through periodic fire occurrences in the past, so reintroduction of the prescribed fire regime on an experimental basis may produce beneficial results. This is by no means an endorsement for using fire. At present, there is no evidence to support the use of fire as a management tool. Seepage swamps should be fenced or otherwise protected from outside influences, particularly if cattle are a threat.

Monitoring Requirements: Tracking of population trends is an important need at extant sites. Monitoring should track the response of populations to natural or artificial changes within the habitat. Flower production, number of flowering stalks per clump, seeds produced per flower and seed viability should all be considered for monitoring. Snyder (pers. comm.) suggested that seed germination and survival in the species needs to be monitored, due to the fact that most significant reproduction in New Jersey appears to be through clonal expansion of existing plants. Effects of habitat expansion is also a monitoring need (Snyder pers. comm.).

Monitoring of seep water quality and surrounding buffer lands is also a strong need. Isolated events in areas surrounding a population could have either adverse or positive effects on extant E. purpurea populations. Excessive herbicide use and run-off in areas adjacent to a site could ultimately damage existing occurrences.

Tracking of population size should be undertaken by conducting annual or periodic counts of flowering stems. In small populations, individual stem counts should be made. In large populations, however, random sampling methodologies should be installed to track population trends. Estimates of stems per plant should also be taken where possible, but clumps often fuse making individual distinction difficult. During this monitoring effort, counts of the number of flowers produced per stem should also be made.

Water quality should be tested and tracked at intervals throughout the growing season. Fluxes of herbicide concentration could occur after periods of heavy rainfall, so testing intervals should be planned accordingly.

Monitoring of surrounding lands should be made every few years in order to track changes that may affect E. purpurea populations. Aerial photographs are valuable in delineating minor changes within adjacent lands.

Management Programs: In Pennsylvania, the Natural Diversity Inventory-West is working toward a management agreement with Cowans Gap State Park which contains the only extant population in the western half of the state. At present, no management guidelines have been set. Contact: Charles Bier, PNDI-WEST, Western Pennsylvania Conservancy, Natural Areas Program, 316 Fourth Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15222. Telephone No. (412) 288-2777.
Monitoring Programs: Simple stem counts are being conducted annually at the single extant Ohio site. Contact: Mary Huffman, Ohio Field Office, The Nature Conservancy, 1504 West 1st Avenue, Columbus, OH 43212. Telephone No. (614) 486-6789.
Management Research Programs: William Brumback of the New England Wildflower Society is currently studying the propagation of this species (Brumback pers. comm., L. Smith pers. comm.). Contact: Bill Brumback, New England Wildflower Society, Garden in the Woods, Hemenway Rd., Framingham, MA 01701. Telephone No. (508) 877-7630.

Cuttings from plants propagated in Massachusetts by Bill Brumback were sent to the Biological Control Lab in Mission, Texas, for the purpose of testing proposed biological controls for E. esula on all native species of Euphorbia. Contact: Dr. Paul Parker, USDA Biological Control Lab, Mission, TX. Telephone No. (512) 580-9784.

Seeds collected from plants in Ohio by Larry Smith (OHFO) will be sent to the USDA Germplasm Center for additional germination research (Brumback pers. comm.). At the time of the finalization of this abstract, the USDA had not yet received any seeds. Contact: USDA Germplasm Center, Seed Lab, Fort Collins, CO. Telephone No. (303) 484-0402, or 484-6418.

Population/Occurrence Delineation Not yet assessed
Population/Occurrence Viability
U.S. Invasive Species Impact Rank (I-Rank) Not yet assessed
NatureServe Conservation Status Factors Edition Date: 02Mar2018
NatureServe Conservation Status Factors Author: Ostlie, W.R. (MRO); rev. P.J. Harmon, rev. D. Gries (1997), rev. Treher (2018)
Management Information Edition Date: 29Mar2018
Management Information Edition Author: WAYNE OSTILE (1990), rev. Treher (2018)
Element Ecology & Life History Edition Date: 05Nov1990
Element Ecology & Life History Author(s): OSTILE, W.

Botanical data developed by NatureServe and its network of natural heritage programs (see Local Programs), The North Carolina Botanical Garden, and other contributors and cooperators (see Sources).

  • Core, E. L. 1966. Vegetation of West Virginia. McClain Printing Co., Parsons, West Virginia. 217 pp.

  • Fernald, M. L. 1932. Some Genera and Species of Rafinesque. Rhodora 34: 21-28. A32FER02PAUS.

  • Fernald, M. L. 1932a. Some genera and species of Rafinesque. Rhodora 34: 21-29.

  • Fernald, M.L. 1949. Gray's Manual of Botany, Eighth edition. American Book Co. New York. B49FER01PAUS

  • Fernald, M.L. 1950 Gray's Manual of Botany, 8th ed. American Book Company, New York. 1632 pp.

  • Flora of North America Editorial Committee. 2016. Flora of North America North of Mexico. Vol. 12. Magnoliophyta: Vitaceae to Garryaceae. Oxford Univ. Press, New York. xxiv + 603 pp.

  • Gleason, H.A. 1952. New Britton & Brown. Illustrated Flora. Lancaster Press Inc. Lancaster, Pa. B52GLE01PAUS

  • Gleason, H.A. 1952. The new Britton and Brown illustrated flora of the northeastern United States and adjacent Canada. 3 volumes. Hafner Press, New York. 1732 pp.

  • Gleason, H.A., and A. Cronquist. 1963. Manual of vascular plants of northeastern United States and adjacent Canada. D. Van Nostrand Company, New York, NY. 810 pp.

  • Hough, M. Y. 1983. New Jersey Wild Plants. Harmony Press, Harmony, New Jersey. 414 pp.


  • Kartesz, J.T. 1994. A synonymized checklist of the vascular flora of the United States, Canada, and Greenland. 2nd edition. 2 vols. Timber Press, Portland, OR.

  • Knoop, J.D. 1990. Euphorbia purpurea (Raf) Fern. Extant in Ohio, Castanea 55 (4) 286-288. A90KNO01PAUS

  • Knoop, J.D. 1990. Euphorbia purpurea (Raf.) Fern. extant in Ohio. Castanea 55(4):286-288.

  • Loeffler, C.C. and B.C. Wegner. 2000. Demographics and deer browsing in three Pennsylvania populations of the globally rare glade spurge, Euphorbia purpurea (Raf.) Fern. Castanea 65(4):273-290.

  • Ogle, D. W. 1989. Rare vascular plants of the Clinch River Gorge area in Russell County, Virginia. Castanea 54(2): 105-110.

  • Radford, A. E., H. E. Ahles, and C. R. Bell. 1968. Manual of the Vascular Flora of the Carolinas. University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill. 1183 pp.

  • Rawinski, T., and J. Cassin. 1986. Final status survey reports for 32 plants. Unpublished report to U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service. Newton Corner, MA. Eastern Heritage Task Force of The Nature Conservancy, Boston. 20 October 1986.


  • Snyder, D. B. 1986. Rare New Jersey plant species rediscovered. Bartonia 52:44-48.

  • Snyder, D.B. 1986. Rare New Jersey Plant Species Rediscovered. Bartonia 52:44-48. A86SNY01PAUS

Use Guidelines & Citation

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 were updated to be current with NatureServe's central databases as of March 2019.
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 © 2019 NatureServe, 2511 Richmond (Jefferson Davis) Highway, Suite 930, Arlington, VA 22202, 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. 2019. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. Version 7.1. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Available (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:

Full metadata for the Mammal Range Maps of North America is available at:

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.