Print Report

CEGL002386 Nuphar advena - Nymphaea odorata Aquatic Vegetation

Type Concept Sentence: No Data Available

Common (Translated Scientific) Name: Broadleaf Pond-lily - American White Water-lily Aquatic Vegetation

Colloquial Name: Water-lily Aquatic Wetland

Hierarchy Level:  Association

Type Concept: This rooted aquatic or open marsh community occupies shallow-water depressions, oxbow ponds, backwater sloughs of river floodplains, slow-moving streams, ponds, and small lakes throughout the central and eastern United States. It is dominated by rooted, floating-leaved aquatic species, with both submergent and emergent aquatics also present. Nuphar advena and Nymphaea odorata are dominants, either in combination together, or each singly. Other species present include Brasenia schreberi, various Potamogeton and Stuckenia spp., Eleocharis robbinsii and other Eleocharis spp., Polygonum amphibium, Polygonum amphibium var. emersum, Sparganium americanum, Lemna spp., Spirodela polyrrhiza, Typha latifolia, and Saururus cernuus. Submerged aquatics more common in the southern part of the range include Cabomba caroliniana, Ceratophyllum demersum, and Heteranthera dubia.

Diagnostic Characteristics: No Data Available

Rationale for Nominal Species or Physiognomic Features: No Data Available

Classification Comments: Can occur in mostly natural ponded wetlands as well as artifactual ones such as borrow pits. On the Conecuh National Forest (Alabama), vegetation of this association occurs in Gum Pond and Open Pond as a mix of Nymphaea odorata and Nuphar advena.

Similar NVC Types: No Data Available
note: No Data Available
Physiognomy and Structure: This community is dominated by rooted, floating-leaved aquatic species, with both submergent and emergent aquatics also present.

Floristics: This community is dominated by rooted, floating-leaved aquatic species, with both submergent and emergent aquatics also present. Nuphar advena (= Nuphar lutea ssp. advena) and Nymphaea odorata are dominants, either in combination together, or each singly. Other species present include Brasenia schreberi, various Potamogeton and Stuckenia spp., Eleocharis robbinsii and other Eleocharis spp., Polygonum amphibium, Polygonum amphibium var. emersum (= Polygonum coccineum), Sparganium americanum, Lemna spp., Spirodela polyrrhiza, Typha latifolia, and Saururus cernuus (Anderson 1982, G. Fleming pers. comm.). Submerged aquatic species more common in the southern part of the range include Cabomba caroliniana, Ceratophyllum demersum, and Heteranthera dubia. This broadly conceived type may include ponds, or zones of ponds, dominated by Nymphaea odorata, with or without Nuphar advena.

Dynamics:  No Data Available
Environmental Description:  This community occupies shallow-water depressions, oxbow ponds, sluggish streams, and backwater sloughs of river floodplains, ponds (natural and artificial), and small lakes. In pools and slow-flowing stretches of river, at Obed River (TN), Nuphar advena is rooted in sandy substrate (Schmalzer and DeSelm 1982).
Geographic Range: This rooted aquatic community occupies shallow, quiet waters throughout the central and eastern United States, extending from Maine to Ontario and Minnesota, south to Oklahoma and east to Georgia.

Nations: CA,US

States/Provinces:  AL, AR, CT, DE, FL, GA, IA, IL, IN, KY, LA, MA, MD, ME, MI, MN, MO, MS, NC, NH, NJ, NY, OH, OK, ON, PA, RI, SC, TN, TX, VA, VT, WI, WV


Confidence Level: Moderate

Confidence Level Comments: No Data Available
Grank: G4G5

Greasons: No Data Available
Type Name Database Code Classification Code
Class 5 Aquatic Vegetation Class C05 5
Subclass 5.B Freshwater Aquatic Vegetation Subclass S13 5.B
Formation 5.B.2 Temperate to Polar Freshwater Aquatic Vegetation Formation F057 5.B.2
Division 5.B.2.Na North American Freshwater Aquatic Vegetation Division D049 5.B.2.Na
Macrogroup 5.B.2.Na.1 Hornwort species - Pond-lily species - Pondweed species Eastern North American Freshwater Aquatic Vegetation Macrogroup M108 5.B.2.Na.1
Group 5.B.2.Na.1.a American White Water-lily - Sago Pondweed - Pondweed species Freshwater Aquatic Vegetation Group G114 5.B.2.Na.1.a
Alliance A4064 American White Water-lily - Pond-lily species - Watershield Aquatic Vegetation Alliance A4064 5.B.2.Na.1.a
Association CEGL002386 Broadleaf Pond-lily - American White Water-lily Aquatic Vegetation CEGL002386 5.B.2.Na.1.a
Concept Lineage: Nymphaea odorata Herbaceous Vegetation merged in

Predecessors: No Data Available

Obsolete Names: No Data Available

Obsolete Parents: No Data Available
Synonomy: = Nuphar advena - Nymphaea odorata Herbaceous Vegetation (Clancy 1996)
= Nuphar lutea ssp. advena - Nymphaea odorata Herbaceous Vegetation (Faber-Langendoen 2001) [Submerged Aquatic Water Lily Subtype]
? L5D2aI1a. Nuphar lutea (Foti et al. 1994)
? New England coastal plain pondshore (Rawinski 1984a)
? Open water marsh with floating-leaved plants (NAP pers. comm. 1998)
= Variegated yellow pond-lily - American white waterlily (Nuphar advena - Nymphaea odorata) community (Metzler and Barrett 2006)
Concept Author(s): D. Faber-Langendoen (2001)

Author of Description: D. Faber-Langendoen, C.W. Nordman, S.C. Gawler and M. Pyne

Acknowledgements: No Data Available

Version Date: 03-10-09
  • ALNHP [Alabama Natural Heritage Program]. 2018. Unpublished data on file. Alabama Natural Heritage Program, Auburn University.
  • Anderson, D. M. 1982. Plant communities of Ohio: A preliminary classification and description. Division of Natural Areas and Preserves, Ohio Department of Natural Resources, Columbus, OH. 182 pp.
  • Breden, T. F., Y. R. Alger, K. S. Walz, and A. G. Windisch. 2001. Classification of vegetation communities of New Jersey: Second iteration. Association for Biodiversity Information and New Jersey Natural Heritage Program, Office of Natural Lands Management, Division of Parks and Forestry, New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Trenton.
  • Chastain, R. A., M.A. Struckhoff, K. W. Grabner, E. D. Stroh, H. He, D. R. Larsen, T. A. Nigh, and J. Drake. 2006. Mapping vegetation communities in Ozark National Scenic Riverways: Final technical report to the National Park Service. Open-File Report 2006-1354. U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA. 90 pp. plus appendices.
  • Clancy, K. 1996. Natural communities of Delaware. Unpublished review draft. Delaware Natural Heritage Program, Division of Fish and Wildlife, Delaware Division of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Smyrna, DE. 52 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.
  • 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.
  • Eichelberger, B. 2011a. Pennsylvania Natural Heritage Program. Spatterdock - Water-lily Emergent Wetland Factsheet. [http://www.naturalheritage.state.pa.us/Community.aspx?=15996] (accessed February 13, 2012)
  • Evans, M., B. Yahn, and M. Hines. 2009. Natural communities of Kentucky 2009. Kentucky Nature Preserves Commission, Frankfort, KY. 22 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.).
  • 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.
  • Fleming, G. P. 2007. Ecological communities of the Potomac Gorge in Virginia: Composition, floristics, and environmental dynamics. Natural Heritage Technical Report 07-12. Unpublished report submitted to the National Park Service. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond. 341 pp. plus appendices.
  • 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., 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.
  • Foti, T., M. Blaney, X. Li, and K. G. Smith. 1994. A classification system for the natural vegetation of Arkansas. Proceedings of the Arkansas Academy of Science 48:50-53.
  • Gawler, S. C. 2002. Natural landscapes of Maine: A guide to vegetated natural communities and ecosystems. Maine Natural Areas Program, Department of Conservation, Augusta, ME.
  • Gawler, S. C., R. E. Zaremba, and Cogan Technology, Inc. 2017. Vegetation mapping inventory project: Minute Man National Historical Park, Massachusetts. Natural Resource Report NPS/MIMA/NRR--2017/1450. National Park Service, Fort Collins, CO.
  • Gawler, S. C., and A. Cutko. 2010. Natural landscapes of Maine: A classification of vegetated natural communities and ecosystems. Maine Natural Areas Program, Department of Conservation, Augusta.
  • Gawler, S. C., and P. S. Bowman. 2012. Vegetation classification and mapping at Saint-Gaudens National Historic Site, New Hampshire. Natural Resource Technical Report NPS/NER/NRTR--2012/584.1. National Park Service, Fort Collins, CO.
  • 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.
  • Hoagland, B. 2000. The vegetation of Oklahoma: A classification for landscape mapping and conservation planning. The Southwestern Naturalist 45(4):385-420.
  • Hop, K., J. Drake, A. Strassman, E. Hoy, J. Jakusz, S. Menard, and J. Dieck. 2013. National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program: Cuyahoga Valley National Park, Ohio. Natural Resource Technical Report NPS/HTLN/NRT--2013/792. National Park Service, Fort Collins, CO. 302 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. Lubinski, and S. Menard. 2005. U.S. Geological Survey-National Park Service Vegetation Mapping Program, Effigy Mounds National Monument, Iowa. USDI U.S. Geological Survey, La Crosse, WI. 202 pp.
  • INAI [Iowa Natural Areas Inventory]. 2017. Vegetation classification of Iowa. Iowa Natural Areas Inventory, Iowa Department of Natural Resources, Des Moines.
  • 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]
  • Lubinski, S., K. Hop, and S. Gawler. 2003. Vegetation Mapping Program: Acadia National Park, Maine. Report produced by U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey, Upper Midwest Environmental Sciences Center, and Maine Natural Areas Program in conjunction with M. Story (NPS Vegetation Mapping Coordinator) NPS, Natural Resources Information Division, Inventory and Monitoring Program, and K. Brown (USGS Vegetation Mapping Coordinator), USGS, Center for Biological Informatics and NatureServe. [http://biology.usgs.gov/npsveg/ftp/vegmapping/acad/reports/acadrpt.pdf]
  • 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.
  • 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.
  • 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.
  • Midwestern Ecology Working Group of NatureServe. No date. International Ecological Classification Standard: International Vegetation Classification. Terrestrial Vegetation. NatureServe, Minneapolis, MN.
  • NAP [Northern Appalachian-Boreal Forest Working Group]. 1998. Northern Appalachian-Boreal Working group discussions. The Nature Conservancy, Boston, MA.
  • NatureServe Ecology - Southeastern United States. No date. Unpublished data. NatureServe, Durham, NC.
  • Nelson, P. 2010. The terrestrial natural communities of Missouri. Revised edition. Missouri Natural Areas Committee, Department of Natural Resources and the Department of Conservation, Jefferson City.
  • Nordman, C., M. Russo, and L. Smart. 2011. Vegetation types of the Natchez Trace Parkway, based on the U.S. National Vegetation Classification. NatureServe Central Databases (International Ecological Classification Standard: Terrestrial Ecological Classifications). Arlington, VA. Data current as of 11 April 2011. 548 pp.
  • 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.
  • 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. 1953. Plant communities of Oklahoma lakes. Ecology 34:561-583.
  • Rawinski, T. 1984a. Natural community description abstract - southern New England calcareous seepage swamp. Unpublished report. The Nature Conservancy, Boston, MA. 6 pp.
  • 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.
  • Schmalzer, P. A., and H. R. DeSelm. 1982. Vegetation, endangered and threatened plants, critical plant habitats and vascular flora of the Obed Wild and Scenic River. Unpublished report. USDI National Park Service, Obed Wild and Scenic River. 2 volumes. 369 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]
  • TNHS [Texas Natural History Survey]. No date. Unpublished data. Texas Natural History Survey, The Nature Conservancy, San Antonio.
  • Thompson, E. H., and E. R. Sorenson. 2005. Wetland, woodland, wildland: A guide to the natural communities of Vermont. The Nature Conservancy and the Vermont Department of Fish and Wildlife. University Press of New England, Hanover, NH. 456 pp.
  • Thompson, E., and J. Jenkins. 1992. Summary of field data from Minuteman National Park plant communities study. A report prepared under a contract with the Massachusetts Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program for the National Park Service. 39 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.
  • White, Jr., R. D. 2003. Vascular plant inventory and plant community classification for Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site. NatureServe, Durham, NC. 160 pp.
  • Zanoni, T. A., P. G. Risser, and I. H. Butler. 1979. Natural areas for Oklahoma. Oklahoma Natural Heritage Program, Norman. 72 pp.
  • Zimmerman, E. A., T. Davis, M. A. Furedi, B. Eichelberger, J. McPherson, S. Seymour, G. Podniesinski, N. Dewar, and J. Wagner, editors. 2012. Terrestrial and palustrine plant communities of Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania Natural Heritage Program, Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Harrisburg. [http://www.naturalheritage.state.pa.us/Communities.aspx]