grass. Sal t-tolerant shrubs such as1r.a frotescens (marsh elder), Lycrrtmcarol inianum (Chri stmasberry), andBaccharis angust if07 ia, B.g70merulifolia, and B. ha7imifolia(saltbushes) are abundant at the forestedge in some locations. Vines arerare at the edge, and both vines andshrubs are scarce in the forest interioruntil at least 1 km inland. <strong>The</strong>ground cover is very sparse. Thiscoastal part <strong>of</strong> Gulf Hammock is quitesimil ar to the hydric hammocks borderingthe marshes along the St. Johnsand Myakka Rivers.With increasing distance from thesalt marsh, cabbage palm, live oak,and southern red-cedar decl ine andhardwoods increase in dominance. Beginningat about 2 km inland, GulfHammock is divisible into three mainvegetation types. Swamps <strong>of</strong> bald cypress,red maple, swamp tupelo, andgreen ash occur in low areas and alongthe poorly defined creek drainages.Forests that might be considered eithermesic or hydric hammock occupysl ightly elevated ridges. <strong>The</strong> overstorycontains swamp chestnut, Shumard,live, laurel, and water oaks,plus sweetgum, southern magnol i a, sugarberry,winged elm, Florida elm,Florida maple, lob101 ly pine, southernred-cedar, pignut hickory, persimmon,red mulberry, and basswood. <strong>The</strong> understoryand ground cover also are diverse.<strong>The</strong> third type <strong>of</strong> vegetation,the majority <strong>of</strong> Gulf Hammock, is betweenthese two "extremes" in speciescomposition and is clearly hydric hammock.This major hydric hammock (Figure19) consists mainly <strong>of</strong> swamp laureloak and sweetgum in combination withlive oak, water oak, loblolly pine,Florida elm, basswood, persimmon, redmaple, sweetbay, sugarberry, and cabbagepalm. <strong>The</strong> average height <strong>of</strong> thedominant canopy trees is about 30 m,with scattered lob1 01 ly pines emerging3-6 m above the canopy. <strong>The</strong> scatteredlive oaks are by far the largesttrees, averaging about twice the trunkdiameter and crown spread <strong>of</strong> the othercanopy tree species. <strong>The</strong> ground atthe bases <strong>of</strong> these big live oaks <strong>of</strong>tenis raised by the root system to form amound. This microtoaoara~hv is particularlywell suited for the estab-1 ishment <strong>of</strong> magnolias, and, in conjunctionwith the spreading crown <strong>of</strong>the live oak, for the growth <strong>of</strong> severalspecies <strong>of</strong> vines (bullace andsummer grape, pepper vine, rattanvine, and climbing buckthorn). A subcanopydominated by hornbeam, wax-myrtle,swamp dogwood, and various treesap1 ings <strong>of</strong>ten is we1 1 developed. <strong>The</strong>ground layer commonly is a dense mixture<strong>of</strong> grasses, sedges, and ferns,but in wet areas the cover is mostlyleaf 1 itter with only a scattering <strong>of</strong>herbaceous pl ants.Patches <strong>of</strong> hydric hammock dominatedby loblolly pine are found within GulfHammock. Some <strong>of</strong> these are naturaland others are the result <strong>of</strong> human activity.Some <strong>of</strong> the higher ridgeswere cleared for farmjng 1 ong ago, apparentlyby German immigrants, andthen abandoned. Now stands <strong>of</strong> largeloblolly pines, locally known as"German Islands", cover the oldfields. A modern activity with similarresults is the clearcutting <strong>of</strong> extensiveareas <strong>of</strong> Gulf Hammock foll owedby the planting <strong>of</strong> loblolly pine.Gulf Hammock and its surroundingsare very flat, with one exception.Old sand dunes .covered with sand pinescrub vegetation are found on thenorth side, just inland from CedarKey. A mixture <strong>of</strong> swamp and hydrichammock occurs adjacent to the dunes,but both <strong>of</strong> these types are somewhatdifferent in composition than elsewherein Gulf Hammock, presumably dueto the continuous supply <strong>of</strong> waterseeping out <strong>of</strong> the dunes and to thethicker layer <strong>of</strong> organic muck. Swamptupelo, the dominant tree or codominantwith green ash, is much moreabundant than in other swamps <strong>of</strong> theregion. <strong>The</strong> hydric hammock also isdifferent in its abundance <strong>of</strong> needlepalm, which is quite scarce elsewherein Gulf Hammock. This part <strong>of</strong> GulfHammock is most similar to the hydrichammocks at Wekiva Springs, MormonBranch Botanical Area in the Ocala <strong>National</strong>Forest, and Tiger Creek.
Gulf Hammock is rep1 aced abruptly atits inland edqe by pine flatwoods.However, strips <strong>of</strong> hydric hammock extendinland along streams such as~ocky Creek, Otter Creek (inland GulfHammock site, Table 5), and the WaccasassaRiver, and these forests graduallybecome less diverse. Cedar elmand American plum do not occur withinthese inland strips. Other trees thatdisappear, roughly in order <strong>of</strong> disappearance,are red buckeye, water locust,Florida maple, Shumard oak,swamp chestnut oak, cabbage palm,wi nged elm, sugarberry, basswood, and,finally, loblolly pine. <strong>The</strong> hydrichammocks farthest i nl and a1 ong thestreams consist mainly <strong>of</strong> swamp 1 aureloak, sweetgum, red map1 e, sweetbay,and Florida elm; occasional speciesi ncl ude 1 i ve oak, persimmon, swampbay,dahoon, and slash pine. Wax-myrtleis an abundant shrub. This forestis most similar to other hydric hammocksfound adjacent to f 1 atwoods andto sandhill streams such as TigerCreek.3.3 SOURCES OF VARIATIONComplex interacting factors probablyi nfl uence the species composition <strong>of</strong>hydric hammock and distinguish it fromother communi ties. We propose thatthe geographical location <strong>of</strong> a stand,the hydrological regime, edaphic conditions, and fire frequency and intensityare the major determinants <strong>of</strong> thestructure <strong>of</strong> hydric hammock. Disturbancesother than fire and flooding,both natural and human, also maygreatly a1 ter the forest's diversityand biomass.conditions, soil type, and fire. However,a number <strong>of</strong> species have restrictedgeographic distributions thatpreclude their presence in some hydrichammocks. Absence <strong>of</strong> such characteristicbut not ubiquitous species maycause doubt about the classification<strong>of</strong> a stand <strong>of</strong> forest unless a complexmodel is kept in mind.Temperate species dominate the flora<strong>of</strong> hydric hammocks but have varioussouthward limits to their distributions(Figure 27). <strong>The</strong> ranges <strong>of</strong>two abundant species, sweetgum andloblolly pine, do not extend south <strong>of</strong>central Florida. A number <strong>of</strong> lesscommon trees, including green ash,Shumard oak, swamp chestnut oak, cedarelm, and winged elm, are restricted tonorthern Florida. So too are some occasional shrubs and herbs: buckthorn,green haw, red buckeye, and switchcane. <strong>The</strong> depauperate flora <strong>of</strong> hydrichammock in Myakka River State Park(Table 5) may result, at least partly,from its location south <strong>of</strong> the ranges<strong>of</strong> many species common to hydric hammocks.A few species are found only in asmall number <strong>of</strong> hydric hammocks be-green ash ] \ Shumard oakI \Plant species whose geographicaldistributions completely include that<strong>of</strong> hydric hammock may be characteristiccomponents <strong>of</strong> this communi tythroughout its range. Live oak, swamplaurel oak, red maple, and many otherspecies that occur in hydric hammocks(Tab1 e 4) range throughout Florida(Little 1978); the absence <strong>of</strong> any <strong>of</strong>these species from a particular standis due to factors such as hydrologicalFigure 27. Natural ranges in Florida <strong>of</strong> fourspecies <strong>of</strong> trees common to hydric hammock(from Little 1978). <strong>The</strong> range <strong>of</strong> green ash acfuallyextends southeastward at least to WekivaSprings, Orange County.
- Page 2 and 3: Copies of this publication may be o
- Page 4 and 5: DISCLAIMERThe opinions and recommen
- Page 6 and 7: CONVERSION TABLEMetric to U.S. Cust
- Page 8 and 9: FIGURESNumber1AL...............Dist
- Page 10 and 11: NumberTABLESPaqeClassifications of
- Page 13 and 14: CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION"Hammock, ho
- Page 15 and 16: whereas hydric hammock is a still-w
- Page 17 and 18: CHAPTER 2. PHYSICAL SElTiNG2.3 CLIM
- Page 19 and 20: Recent and PIe~sIoLene sands clay m
- Page 21 and 22: ern vegetation associations formed-
- Page 23 and 24: Table 3. Comparison of surface soil
- Page 25 and 26: throughout the year in Florida, and
- Page 27 and 28: Figure 13. Flooding and drydown of
- Page 29 and 30: +southari:magnolla+-------cabbage p
- Page 31 and 32: frequency may be once per year in f
- Page 33 and 34: Table 4. Plants occurring in hydric
- Page 35 and 36: Table 4. (Continued).Scientific nam
- Page 37 and 38: of the subcanopy and shrub layers i
- Page 39 and 40: sites were not chosen randomly;rath
- Page 41 and 42: When present in a hydric hammock,ca
- Page 43 and 44: hydric harriniock forests. These sp
- Page 45: was the most frequent shrub in the
- Page 49 and 50: A sequence of changes in plantmat a
- Page 51 and 52: I ~ U mapleswamp laurel oak 3:1100b
- Page 53 and 54: The salt concentration of hydricham
- Page 55 and 56: Cabbage palm is the most fire-toler
- Page 57 and 58: frequent fires, a1 though timber ha
- Page 59: Figure 38. Tree blowdowns due to hu
- Page 62 and 63: locally collected litter lost 85% o
- Page 64 and 65: Table 7. Occurrence of reptiles and
- Page 66 and 67: Table 8. Occurrence of reptiles and
- Page 68 and 69: 4.3 BIRDS4.3.1 Community StructureM
- Page 70 and 71: Table 11. (Concluded).- ----Variabl
- Page 72 and 73: and cerambyci d beet1 es) . Unl i k
- Page 74 and 75: no specific habitat preference; it
- Page 76 and 77: not take place in years of mast fai
- Page 78 and 79: Graves 1977). These observations su
- Page 80 and 81: Consumption of fleshy fruits by res
- Page 82 and 83: CHAPTER 6. LINKAGES WITH OTHER ECOS
- Page 84: R Amerlcan swallow-tailed kite b. t
- Page 87: Conner, W.H., and J.W. Day, Jr. 197
- Page 90 and 91: Duck foods in managed tidalimpoundm
- Page 92 and 93: Puri, M,S., 3.W, Yon, and W.R.Ogles
- Page 94 and 95: Wharton, C.H. 1977. The naturalenvi