Print Report

CEGL006025 Pinus rigida / Quercus ilicifolia / Lespedeza capitata Woodland

Type Concept Sentence: No Data Available


Common (Translated Scientific) Name: Pitch Pine / Bear Oak / Round-head Bushclover Woodland

Colloquial Name: Inland Pitch Pine / Bear Oak Barrens

Hierarchy Level:  Association

Type Concept: This pitch pine - scrub oak barren community occurs on northeastern sand plains, generally on outwash plains, sand dunes and glacial till. Soils are typically sandy, well-drained and nutrient poor. A local history of fire is essential to the maintenance of the community. An open canopy (30-70%) of Pinus rigida over a variable tall-shrub layer (25-95%) of Quercus ilicifolia or Quercus prinoides forms the characteristic structure of this community. In places the canopy may also contain Populus tremuloides, Prunus serotina, Prunus pensylvanica or Betula populifolia. A short-shrub layer of Vaccinium pallidum, Vaccinium angustifolium, Gaylussacia baccata, Comptonia peregrina and Pteridium aquilinum is usually present. Characteristically, small grassy openings dominated by Schizachyrium scoparium, occur within the woodland matrix. These grassy patches are rich in herbaceous species such as Andropogon gerardii, Sorghastrum nutans, Lespedeza capitata, Polygala nuttallii, Lechea mucronata, Lysimachia quadrifolia, Helianthemum canadense and Lupinus perennis. These patches create important habitat for several rare invertebrates.

Diagnostic Characteristics: No Data Available

Rationale for Nominal Species or Physiognomic Features: No Data Available

Classification Comments: This community is similar in composition to other pine barren communities in northern New England. Generally it is richer in species than the more northern type. The grassy assemblages within the community are distinctive. This community is composed of species which are tolerant or favored by a frequent fire regime.

Similar NVC Types: No Data Available
note: No Data Available

Physiognomy and Structure: No Data Available

Floristics: An open canopy (30-70%) of Pinus rigida over a variable tall shrub layer (25-95%) of Quercus ilicifolia or Quercus prinoides forms the characteristic structure of this community. In places the canopy may also contain Populus tremuloides, Prunus serotina, Prunus pensylvanica, or Betula populifolia. A short-shrub layer of Vaccinium pallidum, Vaccinium angustifolium, Gaylussacia baccata, Comptonia peregrina, and Pteridium aquilinum is usually present. Characteristically, small patches of grasslands, dominated by Schizachyrium scoparium, occur within the woodland matrix. These grassy patches are rich in herbaceous species such as Andropogon gerardii, Sorghastrum nutans, Lespedeza capitata, Polygala nuttallii, Lechea mucronata, Lysimachia quadrifolia, Helianthemum canadense, and Lupinus perennis. These patches create important habitat for several rare invertebrates.

Dynamics:  No Data Available

Environmental Description:  This community occurs on outwash plains, sand dunes and glacial till. Soils are typically sandy, well-drained and nutrient-poor. A local history of fire is essential to the maintenance of the community.

Geographic Range: This community is known from the Hudson-Mohawk valley in eastern New York, west-central Long Island, and the inland regions of Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Connecticut, and Rhode Island.

Nations: US

States/Provinces:  CT, MA, NH, NY, PA, RI




Confidence Level: Low

Confidence Level Comments: No Data Available

Grank: G2

Greasons: No Data Available


Concept Lineage: No Data Available

Predecessors: No Data Available

Obsolete Names: No Data Available

Obsolete Parents: No Data Available

Synonomy: ? New England pitch pine/scrub oak barrens (Rawinski 1984a)

Concept Author(s): Eastern Ecology Group

Author of Description: M. Anderson

Acknowledgements: No Data Available

Version Date: 03-18-94

  • Eastern Ecology Working Group of NatureServe. No date. International Ecological Classification Standard: International Vegetation Classification. Terrestrial Vegetation. NatureServe, Boston, MA.
  • Enser, R. W., and J. A. Lundgren. 2006. Natural communities of Rhode Island. A joint project of the Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management Natural Heritage Program and The Nature Conservancy of Rhode Island. Rhode Island Natural History Survey, Kingston. 40 pp. [www.rinhs.org]
  • Fike, J. 1999. Terrestrial and palustrine plant communities of Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania Natural Diversity Inventory. Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Recreation, Bureau of Forestry, Harrisburg, PA. 86 pp.
  • Grossman, D. H., K. Lemon Goodin, and C. L. Reuss, editors. 1994. Rare plant communities of the conterminous United States: An initial survey. The Nature Conservancy. Arlington, VA. 620 pp.
  • Metzler, K., and J. Barrett. 2006. The vegetation of Connecticut: A preliminary classification. State Geological and Natural History Survey, Report of Investigations No. 12. Connecticut Natural Diversity Database, Hartford, CT.
  • Motzkin, G. 1993. Uncommon plant communities of the Connecticut Valley, Massachusetts. Report submitted to the Massachusetts Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program, Division of Fisheries & Wildlife, Boston, MA. 58 pp.
  • Olsvig, L. S. 1980. A comparative study of northeastern Pine Barrens vegetation. Ph.D. dissertation, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY. 479 pp.
  • Pesiri, A. 1982. Sandplains of Connecticut. Unpublished report to The Nature Conservancy, Connecticut Field Office. Middletown, CT.
  • Rawinski, T. 1984a. Natural community description abstract - southern New England calcareous seepage swamp. Unpublished report. The Nature Conservancy, Boston, MA. 6 pp.
  • Reschke, C. 1990. Ecological communities of New York State. New York Natural Heritage Program, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Latham, NY. 96 pp.
  • Schweitzer, D. S., and T. J. Rawinski. 1988. Element stewardship abstract for northeastern pitch pines / scrub oak barrens. Unpublished report. The Nature Conservancy. 21 pp.
  • Sperduto, D. D., and W. F. Nichols. 2004. Natural communities of New Hampshire: A guide and classification. New Hampshire Natural Heritage Bureau, DRED Division of Forests and Lands, Concord. 242 pp.
  • Swain, P. C., and J. B. Kearsley. 2014. Classification of the natural communities of Massachusetts. Version 2.0. Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program, Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife. Westborough, MA. [http://www.mass.gov/nhesp/http://www.mass.gov/eea/agencies/dfg/dfw/natural-heritage/natural-communities/classification-of-natural-communities.html]