Plant Communities of the Midwest - NatureServe

More documents

Recommendations

Info

This work has also benefited from input by academic scientists, Conservancy field staff, and other ecologists. Among them are Lee Frelich and Charles Umbanhowar, who helped with early drafts of Minnesota, Michigan, and Wisconsin types. Charles also reviewed North Dakota types. Tom Blewett, Paul Christiansen, Don Farrar, Susan Galatowitsch, David Glenn-Lewin, Tom Rosburg, and Daryl Smith reviewed drafts of the Iowa portion of the classification. Greg Gremaud, Doug Ladd, and Paul Nelson helped review drafts for Missouri, and Mark Guetersloh and Cynthia Olmstead reviewed those for Illinois. Marilyn Ortt and Alison Cusick provided review for the Ohio drafts. Bonnie Heidel compiled a great deal of information on North Dakota natural communities during her time at the Natural Heritage program there. Collaboration with Jason Greenall and Wasyl Bakowsky (ecologists at the conservation data centres in Manitoba and Ontario, respectively) allowed me to develop a more global perspective on the community types presented here. I thank them all for their input. For an even broader perspective, our ecology team was fortunate to be invited in April of 1994 to a workshop in Britain, led by John Rodwell of the Unit of Vegetation Science at Lancaster University. John adapted the one-week workshop on the British National Vegetation Classification to our team’s specific interests. We had the opportunity to learn firsthand about European classification methods (with a British twist). At that time, John was in the midst of his monumental five-volume series on the classification of British vegetation, now complete (Rodwell 2000), and he proved an able teacher and inspiration to our efforts here, particularly regarding the role of quantitative plot sampling in vegetation classification. As this project neared its end, Shannon Menard and I were struggling with how best to handle the revisions to the ecological groups. These groups, drafted in 1999, were defined based on a midwestern perspective. We were fortunate that Rob Evans, Terrestrial Ecologist with the Conservancy’s Southeastern Conservation Science Center, was more than willing to join in the fray. Working with a similar set of ecological groups drafted by Alan Weakley and others in the South, we were able to resolve many of the differences that existed between the regions. As a result, the version presented in this document is much more coherent across regional lines. Nationally, Dennis Grossman, Kathy Goodin, and Kat Maybury at the Conservancy’s Home Office were instrumental in leading and coordinating efforts to develop a U.S. National Vegetation classification. They supported the work of the regional ecology staff, including, over the years, Alan Weakley, Karen Patterson, Milo Pyne, Sally Landaal, and Dorothy Allard of the Southeastern Region; Lesley Sneddon, Mark Anderson, and Ken Metzler of the Eastern Region; Pat Bourgeron, Lisa Engelking, Rex Crawford, and Marion Reid of the Western Region; and the staff of the Midwestern Region mentioned above. These colleagues helped to ensure that all the types described here in the Midwest are also understood throughout their range in the United States. Many of us have now transferred from the Conservancy to the Association for Biodiversity Information, where we continue the work on the national classification. Funding support was received from a number of federal partners for various projects relating to classification of midwestern plant communities. We gratefully acknowledge their support, in particular the U.S. Geological Survey GAP Analysis Program, the U.S. Forest Service, U.S. Geological Survey Biological Resources Division, the National Park Service, and the Environmental Protection Agency. Many others have contributed to this effort, and though they go unmentioned here, their marks have been made in various ways. I especially want to thank many of my friends and family who helped me maintain a healthy attitude toward work. I have not always been as free with my time as they might have liked. And I owe a great deal to my wife, Kathy Faber-Langendoen, who sometimes refers to herself as my Senior Field Assistant because of all the trips she has been on with me, and who has all-too-often put up with my absences during my road trips. I am thankful that she, like me, does not tire of looking at the natural diversity of the world God has so wonderfully made and shaped. —Don Faber-Langendoen PLANT COMMUNITIES OF THE MIDWEST – 2001 ii
CONTENTS Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................................................i List of Tables................................................................................................................................................................iv List of Figures...............................................................................................................................................................iv I. INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................................................1 II. A BRIEF INTRODUCTION TO THE ECOLOGICAL REGIONS OF THE MIDWEST............................4 GREAT PLAINS REGION ............................................................................................................................................4 PRAIRIE PARKLAND REGION.....................................................................................................................................5 EASTERN DRY DECIDUOUS (BROADLEAF) FORESTS REGION ...................................................................................5 EASTERN MOIST DECIDUOUS (BROADLEAF) FORESTS REGION ................................................................................6 LAURENTIAN MIXED FORESTS REGION ....................................................................................................................6 CONSERVATION CHALLENGES..................................................................................................................................6 III. THE U.S. NATIONAL VEGETATION CLASSIFICATION..........................................................................7 BACKGROUND ..........................................................................................................................................................7 Key Attributes..................................................................................................................................................7 Hierarchy .........................................................................................................................................................8 Association Concept ........................................................................................................................................9 The USNVC and the Natural Heritage Network ...........................................................................................12 METHODS ...............................................................................................................................................................13 Assembling the Information ..........................................................................................................................13 Cross-walking and Integration.......................................................................................................................14 Defining the Association in the Midwest.......................................................................................................16 APPLICATIONS OF THE CLASSIFICATION .................................................................................................................18 IV. ECOLOGICAL GROUPS.................................................................................................................................19 BACKGROUND ........................................................................................................................................................19 METHODS ...............................................................................................................................................................19 STRUCTURE ............................................................................................................................................................20 Overview .......................................................................................................................................................20 Illustration of the Ecological Groups Approach ............................................................................................27 V. PLANT COMMUNITIES OF THE MIDWEST ..............................................................................................31 BIBLIOGRAPHY......................................................................................................................................................55 APPENDIX: PLANT COMMUNITY (ASSOCIATION) DESCRIPTIONS ......................................................61 (available on CD or as a separate volume; see p. 61 for more information) OVERVIEW ASSOCIATION NOMENCLATURE INDEX TO ASSOCIATIONS BY ECOLOGICAL GROUP PLANT COMMUNITY (ASSOCIATION) DESCRIPTIONS ADDITIONAL TYPES OF UNCERTAIN STATUS IN THE MIDWEST A LIST OF ASSOCIATIONS FOR THE MIDWEST IN ORDER OF GLOBAL ELCODE BIBLIOGRAPHY FOR DESCRIPTIONS PLANT COMMUNITIES OF THE MIDWEST – 2001 iii
Page 1: PLANT COMMUNITIES OF THE MIDWEST CL
Page 4 and 5: ISBN 0-9711053-0-8 © 2001 Associat
Page 8 and 9: LISTS OF TABLES AND FIGURES List of
Page 10 and 11: Figure 1a. Distribution of alvar si
Page 12 and 13: (most associations were defined and
Page 14 and 15: particularly in Indiana and western
Page 16 and 17: y ABI and the Natural Heritage Netw
Page 18 and 19: Table 2. Illustration of the USNVC
Page 20 and 21: to year. In addition, the same asso
Page 22 and 23: journal articles, books, agency rep
Page 24 and 25: Once the cross-walk and review of t
Page 26 and 27: peatland, Great Lakes dune-swale co
Page 28 and 29: groupings, such as “forested peat
Page 30 and 31: Table 5. Definitions of ecological
Page 32 and 33: Level 1 distinguishes wetland ecolo
Page 34 and 35: PLATE 2 1. 1.4. Open and Emergent M
Page 36 and 37: PLATE 4 1. 2. 2.1. Shoreline Sand/M
Page 38 and 39: PLATE 6 2. 3. 1. 2.3. Rocky Uplands
Page 40 and 41: PLATE 8 1. 2. 2.5. Forests and Wood
Page 42 and 43: PLATE 10 1. 2. 2.9. Prairies/Grassl
Page 44 and 45: PLATE 12 Map of The Nature Conserva
Page 46 and 47: Great Plains Northern (Laurentian)
Page 48 and 49: Table 6. Ecological groups for the
Page 50 and 51: Grassland Forest and Woodland Prair
Page 52 and 53: High Tp w Woodland Only Mean Annual
Page 54 and 55: Box 1. Summary of information used
Page 56 and 57:
Table 9. A list of plant communitie
Page 58 and 59:
1.4. OPEN AND EMERGENT MARSHES 1.4.
Page 60 and 61:
1.5.5.3. Great Plains Prairie Potho
Page 62 and 63:
1.6.4.5. Southeastern Coastal Plain
Page 64 and 65:
2.3.1.2. Northern Acid Rock Outcrop
Page 66 and 67:
2.4.3.5. Eastern Alkaline Talus Lim
Page 68 and 69:
2.5.2.3. Midwestern Mesic Hardwood
Page 70 and 71:
2.5.6. Rocky Mountains Forests and
Page 72 and 73:
2.8.3. Interior Highlands Oak Savan
Page 74 and 75:
PLANT COMMUNITIES OF THE MIDWEST -
Page 76 and 77:
Bliss, L. C. and G. W. Cox. 1964. P
Page 78 and 79:
Jenkins, R. 1996. Natural Heritage
Page 80 and 81:
Sneddon, L., M. Anderson, and K. Me
show all

Plant Communities of the Midwest - NatureServe

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?