Print Report

CEGL005050 Thuja occidentalis Limestone Bedrock Woodland

Type Concept Sentence: No Data Available


Common (Translated Scientific) Name: Northern White-cedar Limestone Bedrock Woodland

Colloquial Name: Northern White-cedar Limestone Bedrock Woodland

Hierarchy Level:  Association

Type Concept: This white-cedar pavement woodland community type is found in the lower and central Great Lakes regions of the United States and Canada. Stands occur on relatively flat, exposed limestone bedrock, often in association with alvars or limestone cliffs. Stands may be found on bedrock with as much as 1 m of soil. Canopy cover ranges from open to >90%, and varies from pure evergreen to mixed evergreen-deciduous. Picea glauca and Thuja occidentalis dominate the overstory in the pure evergreen phase, but Pinus strobus (emergent) and Tsuga canadensis can also be found in the mixed phase, along with deciduous species, such as Acer saccharum, Quercus rubra, and Ostrya virginiana. The shrub layer is sparse. Herbaceous cover is generally sparse in the evergreen phase, containing wide-ranging forbs, such as Maianthemum canadense, but is more diverse in the mixed phase.

Diagnostic Characteristics: No Data Available

Rationale for Nominal Species or Physiognomic Features: No Data Available

Classification Comments: Some stands have closed canopy cover, others more open. This type currently contains two phases - the evergreen phase with more closed canopies (>75% evergreen and >90% canopy cover) and the mixed evergreen-deciduous phase (between 25 and 75% evergreen and deciduous species, with 70-80% canopy cover). Future work may split these phases apart, which should be done in consultation with Ontario ecologists. Mapping should consider the two phases as separate, where feasible.

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

Physiognomy and Structure: No Data Available

Floristics: Canopy cover ranges from open to >90%, and varies from pure evergreen to mixed evergreen-deciduous. Picea glauca and Thuja occidentalis dominate the overstory in the pure evergreen phase, but Pinus strobus (emergent) and Tsuga canadensis can also be found in the mixed phase, along with deciduous species, such as Acer saccharum, Quercus rubra, and Ostrya virginiana. The shrub layer is sparse. Herbaceous cover is generally sparse in the evergreen phase, containing wide-ranging forbs, such as Maianthemum canadense, but is more diverse in the mixed phase (Reschke 1990, Bakowsky and Lee 1996).

Dynamics:  No Data Available

Environmental Description:  In alvar situations, type can occur on shallow soils over relatively flat, limestone bedrock. In non-alvar situations, type can occur on thin-soil cliff-rim situations, such as escarpments, or on steep, colluvial slopes.

Geographic Range: This white-cedar pavement woodland community type is found in the lower and central Great Lakes regions of the United States and Canada, ranging from Michigan east to Ontario and New York.

Nations: CA,US

States/Provinces:  MI, ON, VT




Confidence Level: Low

Confidence Level Comments: No Data Available

Grank: G2G4

Greasons: No Data Available


Concept Lineage: No Data Available

Predecessors: No Data Available

Obsolete Names: No Data Available

Obsolete Parents: No Data Available

Synonomy: = Thuja occidentalis Limestone Bedrock Woodland (Reschke 1990)
= Thuja occidentalis Limestone Bedrock Woodland (Faber-Langendoen 2001)

Concept Author(s): D. Faber-Langendoen (2001)

Author of Description: D. Faber-Langendoen

Acknowledgements: No Data Available

Version Date: 08-06-98

  • Bakowsky, W. D., and H. T. Lee. 1996. Vegetation communities of southern Ontario (draft). Ontario Natural Heritage Information Centre and Southern Region STTU, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Peterborough, Ontario. 87 pp.
  • Faber-Langendoen, D., editor. 2001. Plant communities of the Midwest: Classification in an ecological context. Association for Biodiversity Information, Arlington, VA. 61 pp. plus appendix (705 pp.).
  • Kost, M. A., D. A. Albert, J. G. Cohen, B. S. Slaughter, R. K. Schillo, C. R. Weber, and K. A. Chapman. 2007. Natural communities of Michigan: Classification and description. Report No. 2007-21, Michigan Natural Features Inventory, Lansing. 314 pp. [http://web4.msue.msu.edu/mnfi/reports/2007-21_Natural_Communites_of_Michigan_Classification_and_Description.pdf]
  • Lee, H., W. Bakowsky, J. Riley, J. Bowles, M. Puddister, P. Uhlig, and S. McMurray. 1998. Ecological land classification for southern Ontario: First approximation and its application. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Southcentral Science Section, Science Development and Transfer Branch. SCSS Field Guide FG-02.
  • Midwestern Ecology Working Group of NatureServe. No date. International Ecological Classification Standard: International Vegetation Classification. Terrestrial Vegetation. NatureServe, Minneapolis, MN.
  • ONHIC [Ontario Natural Heritage Information Centre]. 2018. Unpublished data. Ontario Natural Heritage Information Centre, Ministry of Natural Resources, Ontario, Canada.
  • 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.