Print Report

CEGL002186 Cornus sericea - Salix spp. - (Rosa palustris) Shrub Swamp

Type Concept Sentence: No Data Available

Common (Translated Scientific) Name: Red-osier Dogwood - Willow species - (Swamp Rose) Shrub Swamp

Colloquial Name: Red-osier Dogwood - Willow Midwest Shrub Swamp

Hierarchy Level:  Association

Type Concept: This dogwood - willow shrub swamp community is found in the central midwestern region of the United States and Canada. Stands are found along streams and lakes, or in upland depressions. Hydrology is variable but is typically seasonally flooded. Soils are wet, organic, and minerotrophic, with either highly decomposed peat or fine mineral soils. The vegetation is dominated by tall shrubs between 1 and 3 m tall, with at least 25% cover, and often very dense (>60% cover). More open stands may have high graminoid cover. Trees may be scattered but cover less than 25%. Composition of the shrub layer is quite diverse, primarily due to the diversity of Salix spp., which collectively share dominance with Cornus sericea. Willow species include Salix bebbiana, Salix discolor, Salix eriocephala, Salix interior, Salix fragilis, and Salix petiolaris. Other shrub associates include Cephalanthus occidentalis (southeastward), Cornus amomum, Ribes americanum, Rosa palustris (more common eastward), Rosa blanda and Rosa woodsii var. woodsii (more common westward), Rubus pubescens (northward), Rubus idaeus ssp. strigosus, Sambucus nigra ssp. canadensis, Spiraea alba, and Viburnum lentago. Woody vines present include Clematis virginiana, Parthenocissus quinquefolia, and Toxicodendron radicans. Characteristic herbs include Asclepias incarnata, Symphyotrichum lanceolatum var. lanceolatum, Calamagrostis canadensis, Eutrochium maculatum, Glyceria striata, Impatiens capensis, Lycopus americanus, Lycopus uniflorus, Phalaris arundinacea, Solidago gigantea, and Thalictrum dasycarpum. A variety of sedges may dominate more open stands, including Carex lacustris and Carex stricta. Tree species include Acer rubrum, Fraxinus pennsylvanica, and Ulmus americana.

Diagnostic Characteristics: No Data Available

Rationale for Nominal Species or Physiognomic Features: No Data Available

Classification Comments: The closely related shrub meadow type is ~Cornus sericea - Salix (bebbiana, discolor, petiolaris) / Calamagrostis stricta Shrub Swamp (CEGL002187)$$, with which this type intergrades, and which generally has a more open shrub cover (25-50% cover). But that type occurs in the Laurentian region. It is also possible that a number of different Salix and Cornus shrub swamp types could be recognized with further study. A boreal/subboreal type may also be needed (e.g., Harris et al. 1996). Rich shrub fens, typically on a more peaty substrate or with calcareous indicators overlap to some degree with this type, but are a separate group (e.g., ~Cornus amomum - Salix spp. - Toxicodendron vernix - Rhamnus lanceolata Fen (CEGL005087)$$ and ~Cornus sericea - Cornus amomum - Aronia melanocarpa - Viburnum lentago Fen (CEGL005088)$$). In Ontario, a coarsely defined type, ~Mixed Deciduous Shrub Swamp (CEGL005086)$$, covers a number of more locally dominant species recorded there, e.g., shrub swamps dominated by any of the following: Acer spicatum, Lindera benzoin, Viburnum dentatum, Viburnum lentago (Bakowsky and Lee 1996, Lee et al. 1998). In New York, this type may occur on the Great Lakes plain.

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

Floristics: The vegetation is dominated by tall shrubs between 1 and 3 m tall, with at least 25% cover, and often very dense (>60% cover). More open stands may have high graminoid cover. Trees may be scattered, but cover less than 25%. Composition of the shrub layer is quite diverse, primarily due to the diversity of Salix spp., which collectively share dominance with Cornus sericea. Willow species include Salix bebbiana, Salix discolor, Salix eriocephala, Salix interior, Salix fragilis, and Salix petiolaris. Other shrubs associates include Cephalanthus occidentalis (southeastward), Cornus amomum, Ribes americanum, Rosa palustris (more common eastward), Rosa blanda and Rosa woodsii var. woodsii (= Rosa macounii) (more common westward), Rubus pubescens (northward), Rubus idaeus ssp. strigosus (= Rubus strigosus), Sambucus nigra ssp. canadensis (= Sambucus canadensis), Spiraea alba, and Viburnum lentago. Woody vines present include Clematis virginiana, Parthenocissus quinquefolia, and Toxicodendron radicans. Characteristic herbs include Asclepias incarnata, Symphyotrichum lanceolatum var. lanceolatum (= Aster simplex), Calamagrostis canadensis, Eutrochium maculatum (= Eupatorium maculatum), Glyceria striata (= Glyceria nervata), Impatiens capensis (= Impatiens biflora), Lycopus americanus, Lycopus uniflorus, Phalaris arundinacea, Solidago gigantea, and Thalictrum dasycarpum. A variety of sedges may dominate more open stands, including Carex lacustris and Carex stricta. Tree species include Acer rubrum, Fraxinus pennsylvanica, and Ulmus americana (Curtis 1959, White and Madany 1978, Chapman et al. 1989, Reschke 1990, MNNHP 1993, Harris et al. 1996).

Dynamics:  Shrub swamps may naturally succeed herbaceous wet meadows as part of successional series in lakes and ponds. They may also originate from clearing of forested swamps (Curtis 1959), or draining of wet meadows (MNNHP 1993). Such open herbaceous meadows may first succeed to a shrubby meadow before becoming a dense shrub swamp. Infrequent fires may have maintained shrub swamps in the western part of the range, preventing tree canopy closure (MNNHP 1993).
Environmental Description:  Stands are found along streams and lakes, or in upland depressions. Hydrology is variable, but is typically seasonally flooded. Soils are wet, organic, and minerotrophic, with either highly decomposed peat or fine mineral soils (Curtis 1959, Harris et al. 1996).
Geographic Range: This dogwood - willow shrubland swamp is found in the upper midwestern region of the United States and adjacent Canada, ranging from southeastern Minnesota and eastern Iowa east to western New York and Ontario.

Nations: CA,US

States/Provinces:  IA, IL, IN, MI, MN, OH, ON, WI


Confidence Level: Moderate

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.4 Temperate to Polar Freshwater Marsh, Wet Meadow & Shrubland Formation F013 2.C.4
Division 2.C.4.Nd Eastern North American Temperate Freshwater Marsh, Wet Meadow & Shrubland Division D323 2.C.4.Nd
Macrogroup 2.C.4.Nd.2 Broadleaf Cattail - White Snakeroot - Rush species Marsh, Wet Meadow & Shrubland Macrogroup M069 2.C.4.Nd.2
Group 2.C.4.Nd.2.e Prairie Cordgrass - Bluejoint - Sedge species Midwest Wet Prairie, Wet Meadow & Shrub Swamp Group G770 2.C.4.Nd.2.e
Alliance A4378 Red-osier Dogwood - Gray Alder - Common Buttonbush Midwest Shrub Swamp Alliance A4378 2.C.4.Nd.2.e
Association CEGL002186 Red-osier Dogwood - Willow species - (Swamp Rose) Shrub Swamp CEGL002186 2.C.4.Nd.2.e
Concept Lineage: No Data Available

Predecessors: No Data Available

Obsolete Names: No Data Available

Obsolete Parents: No Data Available
Synonomy: = Cornus sericea - Salix spp. - (Rosa palustris) Shrubland (Faber-Langendoen 2001) [Shrub Carr]
= Shrub Carr (Curtis 1959)
< Shrub Swamps (Anderson 1996)
= Willow Swamp (MNNHP 1993)
Concept Author(s): D. Faber-Langendoen (2001)

Author of Description: D. Faber-Langendoen

Acknowledgements: No Data Available

Version Date: 12-08-98
  • Anderson, D. M. 1996. The vegetation of Ohio: Two centuries of change. Draft. Ohio Biological Survey.
  • 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.
  • Borowitz, V. A., and A. G. Stephenson. 1985. Fruit composition and patterns of fruit dispersal of two Cornus spp. Oecologia 67:435-441.
  • CDPNQ [Centre de données sur le patrimoine naturel du Québec]. No date. Unpublished data. Centre de données sur le patrimoine naturel du Québec, Québec.
  • Chapman, K. A., D. A. Albert, and G. A. Reese. 1989. Draft descriptions of Michigan''s natural community types. Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Lansing, MI. 35 pp.
  • Curtis, J. T. 1959. The vegetation of Wisconsin: An ordination of plant communities. Reprinted in 1987. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison. 657 pp.
  • Edinger, G. J., D. J. Evans, S. Gebauer, T. G. Howard, D. M. Hunt, and A. M. Olivero, editors. 2014a. Ecological communities of New York state. Second edition. A revised and expanded edition of Carol Reschke''s ecological communities of New York state. New York Natural Heritage Program, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Albany, NY.
  • 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.).
  • Harris, A. G., S. C. McMurray, P. W. C. Uhlig, J. K. Jeglum, R. F. Foster, and G. D. Racey. 1996. Field guide to the wetland ecosystem classification for northwestern Ontario. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Northwest Science and Technology, Thunder Bay, Ontario. Field guide FG-01. 74 pp. plus appendix.
  • Homoya, M. A., J. Aldrich, J. Bacone, L. Casebere, and T. Post. 1988. Indiana natural community classification. Indiana Natural Heritage Program, Indianapolis, IN. Unpublished manuscript.
  • Hop, K., D. Faber-Langendoen, M. Lew-Smith, N. Aaseng, and S. Lubinski. [1999]. USGS-NPS Vegetation Mapping Program: Voyageurs National Park, Minnesota. USDI U.S. Geological Survey, La Crosse, WI. 210 pp.
  • Hop, K., S. Lubinski, J. Dieck, J. Drake, and S. Menard. 2009. National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program: Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore, Indiana. USDI U.S. Geological Survey, La Crosse, WI, and NatureServe, St. Paul, MN. 312 pp.
  • Hop, K., S. Menard, J. Drake, S. Lubinski, and J. Dieck. 2010c. National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program: Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore, Michigan. Natural Resource Report NPS/GLKN/NRR-2010/201. National Park Service, Fort Collins, Colorado. 358 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.
  • MNNHP [Minnesota Natural Heritage Program]. 1993. Minnesota''s native vegetation: A key to natural communities. Version 1.5. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Natural Heritage Program, St. Paul, MN. 110 pp.
  • Midwestern Ecology Working Group of NatureServe. No date. International Ecological Classification Standard: International Vegetation Classification. Terrestrial Vegetation. NatureServe, Minneapolis, MN.
  • Minnesota DNR [Minnesota Department of Natural Resources]. 2003-2005a. Field guide to the native plant communities of Minnesota. Three volumes: The Laurentian Mixed Forest Province (2003), The Eastern Broadleaf Forest Province (2005c), The Prairie Parkland and Tallgrass Aspen Parklands provinces (2005b). Ecological Land Classification Program, Minnesota County Biological Survey, and Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, St. Paul.
  • Minnesota DNR [Minnesota Department of Natural Resources]. 2003. Field guide to the native plant communities of Minnesota: The Laurentian Mixed Forest Province. Ecological Land Classification Program, Minnesota County Biological Survey, and Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, St. Paul.
  • ONHD [Ohio Natural Heritage Database]. No date. Vegetation classification of Ohio and unpublished data. Ohio Natural Heritage Database, Division of Natural Areas and Preserves, Ohio Department of Natural Resources, Columbus.
  • 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.
  • WDNR [Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources]. 2015. The ecological landscapes of Wisconsin: An assessment of ecological resources and a guide to planning sustainable management. PUB-SS-1131 2015. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Madison. [http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/landscapes/Book.html]
  • White, J., and M. Madany. 1978. Classification of natural communities in Illinois. Pages 311-405 in: Natural Areas Inventory technical report: Volume I, survey methods and results. Illinois Natural Areas Inventory, Urbana, IL.