Print Report

CEGL004186 Juncus roemerianus Salt Marsh

Type Concept Sentence: No Data Available

Common (Translated Scientific) Name: Black Needlerush Salt Marsh

Colloquial Name: Needlerush High Salt Marsh

Hierarchy Level:  Association

Type Concept: This broad-ranging Juncus roemerianus salt marsh community is characterized by discrete, dense patches usually strongly dominated by Juncus roemerianus, often with few other associates, or with low cover of Distichlis spicata, Spartina alterniflora, Spartina patens, and Limonium carolinianum. As currently defined, this community occurs in a variety of settings in different marsh regions including both "high" and "low" marshes. For example, large expanses of this type are found in northwest Florida at or below the mean high water line. In other regions it may be found as isolated patches within high salt marsh, or may dominate vast areas at the heads of tidal creeks. In general, the prevalence of Juncus roemerianus in Florida indicates the prevalence of high marshes (above mean high water). Its hydrology is generally irregularly tidally flooded.

Diagnostic Characteristics: No Data Available

Rationale for Nominal Species or Physiognomic Features: No Data Available

Classification Comments: This community is common on the southeastern seaboard, but large undisturbed areas are of high conservation concern. Although this community exhibits little floristic variation across its range, the associated animal species may vary to a greater extent. This community may not occur west of Texas. Juncus roemerianus was found to be lower in elevation than the associated Spartina patens type and mixed type (Cooper and Waits 1973).

Similar NVC Types: No Data Available
note: No Data Available
Physiognomy and Structure: No Data Available

Floristics: The very dense vegetation is typically exclusively codominated by Juncus roemerianus and Spartina alterniflora. Tall and short growth-form zones have been noted in several areas (Kruczynski et al. 1978, Hackney and de la Cruz 1982, Stout 1984, Montague and Wiegert 1990). Associates that may occur at low cover include Borrichia frutescens, Baccharis halimifolia, Spartina alterniflora, Distichlis spicata, Bolboschoenus robustus (= Scirpus robustus), Limonium carolinianum, Symphyotrichum tenuifolium (= Aster tenuifolius), Symphyotrichum subulatum (= Aster subulatus), and (in more southern occurrences) Ipomoea sagittata.

Dynamics:  Lynch (1941) described three types of fires: cover burns, root burns, and peat burns. Net primary productivity increased in a Juncus roemerianus marsh after a winter burn in Mississippi, but after repeated burns vigor and growth of Juncus roemerianus declined and other species began to replace it. Hackney and de la Cruz (1981) also pointed out that monospecific Juncus roemerianus marshes are more difficult to burn on such a frequent basis and may resist changes to community structure that may occur in more mixed Juncus roemerianus marshes.
Environmental Description:  Large expanses of this type are found in northwest Florida, where approximately 60% of the salt marshes consist of monospecific stands of this type. These stands extend nearly to the water''s edge and may be considered low marsh (Montague and Wiegert 1990). In other regions of Florida, including northeast Florida, Indian River (central Atlantic coast), and south Florida, Juncus roemerianus occurs in smaller discrete patches of high marsh (Montague and Wiegert 1990). Presumably, this type also occurs primarily as high salt marsh along the Atlantic coast as well (Hackney and de la Cruz 1982). In Mississippi Juncus roemerianus marsh was inundated less than 5.4% of the time that any portion of the marsh was flooded (Eleuterius and Eleuterius 1979). Due to longer and more frequent periods of exposure and resulting evaporation, interstitial water salinity may be higher than more frequently inundated zones. In addition, the interstitial water salinity was generally higher and more stable than flood water (Hackney and de la Cruz 1982). A range of soil conditions may be present in this broadly defined association, but soils are generally poorly to very poorly drained. In some areas, including tall-growth zones, soils were highly organic and peaty (averaging 15 cm in depth?), while shorter zones occurred on sandy soils underlain by clay (Eleuterius and Caldwell 1984). In general, Juncus roemerianus occurs on sandy substrates (Penfound 1952). pH at the Mississippi site was 6.2 (Hackney and de la Cruz 1982).
Geographic Range: This community is widespread along the Atlantic and Gulf coasts of North America ranging from Delaware south to Florida, and west to Texas.

Nations: US

States/Provinces:  AL, DE, FL, GA, LA?, MD, MS, NC, SC, TX, VA


Confidence Level: Low

Confidence Level Comments: No Data Available
Grank: G5

Greasons: No Data Available
Type Name Database Code Classification Code
Class 2 Shrub & Herb Vegetation Class C02 2
Subclass 2.C Shrub & Herb Wetland Subclass S44 2.C
Formation 2.C.5 Salt Marsh Formation F035 2.C.5
Division 2.C.5.Nb North American Atlantic & Gulf Coastal Salt Marsh Division D034 2.C.5.Nb
Macrogroup 2.C.5.Nb.1 North American Atlantic & Gulf Coastal Salt Marsh Macrogroup M079 2.C.5.Nb.1
Group 2.C.5.Nb.1.c Saltmeadow Cordgrass - Jesuit''s-bark High Salt Marsh Group G121 2.C.5.Nb.1.c
Alliance A4020 Black Needlerush Salt Marsh Alliance A4020 2.C.5.Nb.1.c
Association CEGL004186 Black Needlerush Salt Marsh CEGL004186 2.C.5.Nb.1.c
Concept Lineage: merged?

Predecessors: No Data Available

Obsolete Names: No Data Available

Obsolete Parents: No Data Available
Synonomy: = Juncus roemerianus Herbaceous Vegetation (McManamay 2017b)
= Juncus roemerianus Herbaceous Vegetation (Bowman 2000)
= Juncus roemerianus Tidal Herbaceous Vegetation (Coulling 2002)
= Juncus roemerianus association of the low marsh (Adams 1963) [North Carolina]
= Juncus type (Cooper and Waits 1973) [North Carolina]
< Spartina - Distichlis - Juncus associes (Penfound 1952)
= Irregularly flooded salt marsh (Jenkins 1974) [Chesapeake Bay]
= Lower high marsh (Stalter 1973a) [South Carolina]
= Needlerush - saltmeadow type (Nicholson and Van Deusen 1954) [Maryland]
< Saline Marsh (Wieland 1994a)
< Salt marsh (Higgins et al. 1971) [Assateague Island]
< Salt marsh community (Hill 1986) [Assateague Island]
Concept Author(s): Eastern Ecology Group

Author of Description: R.E. Evans, L.A. Sneddon and M. Pyne

Acknowledgements: No Data Available

Version Date: 01-04-08
  • ALNHP [Alabama Natural Heritage Program]. 2018. Unpublished data on file. Alabama Natural Heritage Program, Auburn University.
  • Adams, D. A. 1963. Factors influencing vascular plant zonation in North Carolina salt marshes. Ecology 44:445-456.
  • Bowman, P. 2000. Draft classification for Delaware. Unpublished draft. Delaware Natural Heritage Program, Smyrna, DE.
  • Cooper, A. W., and E. D. Waits. 1973. Vegetation types in an irregularly flooded salt marsh on the North Carolina Outer Banks. Journal of the Elisha Mitchell Scientific Society 89:78-91.
  • Coulling, P. P. 2002. A preliminary classification of tidal marsh, shrub swamp, and hardwood swamp vegetation and assorted non-tidal, chiefly non-maritime, herbaceous wetland communities of the Virginia Coastal Plain. October 2002. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage. Natural Heritage Technical Report 02-18. 30 pp.
  • Coxe, R. 2009. Guide to Delaware vegetation communities. Spring 2009 edition. State of Delaware, Division of Fish and Wildlife, Delaware Natural Heritage Program, Smyrna.
  • Diamond, D. D. 1993. Classification of the plant communities of Texas (series level). Unpublished document. Texas Natural Heritage Program, Austin. 25 pp.
  • Eleuterius, L. N. 1976. The distribution of Juncus roemerianus in the salt marshes of North America. Chesapeake Science 17(4):289-292.
  • Eleuterius, L. N., and C. K. Eleuterius. 1979. Tide levels and salt marsh zonation. Bulletin of Marine Science 29:394-400.
  • Eleuterius, L. N., and J. D. Caldwell. 1984. Flowering phenology of tidal marsh plants in Mississippi. Castanea 49:172-179.
  • Fleming, G. P., K. D. Patterson, and K. Taverna. 2017. The natural communities of Virginia: A classification of ecological community groups and community types. Third approximation. Version 3.0. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond, VA. [http://www.dcr.virginia.gov/natural-heritage/natural-communities/]
  • 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., 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.
  • GNHP [Georgia Natural Heritage Program]. 2018. Unpublished data. Georgia Natural Heritage Program, Wildlife Resources Division, Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Social Circle.
  • Govus, T. E. 1998. Fort Pulaski National Monument Inventory. Final report. Purchase Order # 1443PX509097564. Prepared for National Park Service, Southeast Region, Atlanta, GA. 33 pp. plus appendices and maps.
  • Hackney, C. T., and A. A. de la Cruz. 1981. Effects of fire on brackish marsh communities: Management implications. Wetlands (81-09):75-86.
  • Hackney, C. T., and A. A. de la Cruz. 1982. The structure and function of brackish marshes in the north central Gulf of Mexico: A ten year case study. Pages 89-107 in: B. Gopal et al., editors. Wetlands ecology and management. National Institute of Ecology. International Science Publication, Jaipur, India.
  • Harrison, J. W. 2001. Herbaceous tidal wetland communities of Maryland''s eastern shore: Identification, assessment and monitoring. Report submitted to the U.S. EPA (Clean Water Act 1998 State Wetlands Protection Development Grant Program). Biodiversity Program, Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Wildlife and Heritage Division. 30 June 2001. [U.S. EPA Reference Wetland Natural communities of Maryland''s Herbaceous Tidal Wetlands Grant #CD993724].
  • Harrison, J. W. 2011. The natural communities of Maryland: 2011 working list of ecological community groups and community types. Unpublished report. Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Wildlife and Heritage Service, Natural Heritage Program, Annapolis. 33 pp.
  • 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.
  • Higgins, E. A. T., R. D. Rappleye, and R. G. Brown. 1971. The flora and ecology of Assateague Island. University of Maryland Experiment Station Bulletin A-172. 70 pp.
  • Hill, S. R. 1986. An annotated checklist of the vascular flora of Assateague Island (Maryland and Virginia). Castanea 5:265-305.
  • Jenkins, D. 1974. Natural areas of the Chesapeake Bay region: Ecological priorities. Smithsonian Institute, Ecology Program, Center for Natural Areas Ecology.
  • Kruczynski, W. L., C. B. Subrahmanyam, and S. H. Drake. 1978. Studies on the plant community of a north Florida salt marsh. Bulletin of Marine Science 28:707-715.
  • LNHP [Louisiana Natural Heritage Program]. 2009. Natural communities of Louisiana. Louisiana Natural Heritage Program, Louisiana Department of Wildlife & Fisheries, Baton Rouge. 46 pp. [http://www.wlf.louisiana.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/page_wildlife/6776-Rare%20Natural%20Communities/LA_NAT_COM.pdf]
  • Lynch, J. J. 1941. The place of burning in management of Gulf Coast wildlife refuges. Journal of Wildlife Management 5:454-457.
  • MSNHP [Mississippi Natural Heritage Program]. 2006. Ecological communities of Mississippi. Museum of Natural Science, Mississippi Department of Wildlife, Fisheries, and Parks, Jackson, MS. 9 pp.
  • McManamay, R. H, A.C. Curtis, and S.C. Heath. 2013b. Vegetation mapping at Fort Pulaski National Monument. Natural Resource Report NPS/SECN/NRR--2013/718. National Park Service, Fort Collins, CO. 180 pp.
  • McManamay, R. H. 2017a. Vegetation mapping at Cumberland Island National Seashore. Natural Resource Report NPS/SECN/NRR--2017/1511. National Park Service, Fort Collins, CO. 422 pp.
  • McManamay, R. H. 2017b. Vegetation mapping at Cape Lookout National Seashore. Natural Resource Report NPS/SECN/NRR--2017/1561. National Park Service, Fort Collins, CO. 264 pp.
  • McManamay, R. H., A. C. Curtis, and S. L. Corbett. 2013a. Vegetation mapping at Fort Frederica National Monument. Natural Resource Report NPS/FOFR/NRR--2013/684. National Park Service, Fort Collins, CO. 156 pp.
  • Montague, C. L., and R. G. Wiegert. 1990. Salt marshes. Pages 481-516 in: R. L. Myers and J. J. Ewel, editors. Ecosystems of Florida. University of Central Florida Press, Orlando.
  • Nelson, J. B. 1986. The natural communities of South Carolina: Initial classification and description. South Carolina Wildlife and Marine Resources Department, Division of Wildlife and Freshwater Fisheries, Columbia, SC. 55 pp.
  • Nicholson, W. R., and R. D. Van Deusen. 1954. Marshes of Maryland. Maryland Game and Inland Fish Commission. Resource Study Report No. 6. Baltimore, MD.
  • Peet, R. K., T. R. Wentworth, M. P. Schafale, and A.S. Weakley. No date. Unpublished data of the North Carolina Vegetation Survey. University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.
  • Penfound, W. T. 1952. Southern swamps and marshes. Botanical Review 7:413-446.
  • Schafale, M. P. 2012. Classification of the natural communities of North Carolina, 4th Approximation. North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, Division of Parks and Recreation, Natural Heritage Program, Raleigh.
  • Schafale, M. P., and A. S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the natural communities of North Carolina. Third approximation. North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, Division of Parks and Recreation, Natural Heritage Program, Raleigh. 325 pp.
  • Sneddon, L., J. Menke, A. Berdine, E. Largay, and S. Gawler. 2017. Vegetation classification and mapping of Assateague Island National Seashore. Natural Resource Report NPS/ASIS/NRR--2017/1422. National Park Service, Fort Collins, CO. 512 pp.
  • Southeastern Ecology Working Group of NatureServe. No date. International Ecological Classification Standard: International Vegetation Classification. Terrestrial Vegetation. NatureServe, Durham, NC.
  • Stalter, R. 1973a. The flora of Turtle Island, Jasper Co., South Carolina. Castanea 38:35-37.
  • Stalter, R. 1973b. Factors influencing the distribution of vegetation of the Cooper River Estuary. Castanea 38:18-24.
  • Stout, J. P. 1984. The ecology of irregularly flooded salt marshes of the northeastern Gulf of Mexico: A community profile. USDI Fish and Wildlife Service, Minerals Management Service. Biological Report 85 (7.1). 98 pp.
  • TNC [The Nature Conservancy]. 1995c. NBS/NPS Vegetation Mapping Program: Vegetation classification of Assateague Island National Seashore. Unpublished report. The Nature Conservancy, Eastern Regional Office, Boston, MA.
  • Wieland, R. G. 1994a. Marine and estuarine habitat types and associated ecological communities of the Mississippi Coast. Museum Technical Report 25. Mississippi Department of Wildlife, Fisheries, and Parks, Museum of Natural Science, Jackson, MS. 270 pp.