Print Report

CEGL006237 Acer saccharum - Fraxinus americana - Tilia americana - Liriodendron tulipifera / Actaea racemosa Forest

Type Concept Sentence: No Data Available

Common (Translated Scientific) Name: Sugar Maple - White Ash - American Basswood - Tuliptree / Black Baneberry Forest

Colloquial Name: Central Appalachian Rich Cove Forest

Hierarchy Level:  Association

Type Concept: This is a rich mesic, deciduous forest of the High Alleghenies, Western Allegheny Plateau, and Central Appalachians south to the Cumberlands of eastern Kentucky. Stands occur in coves, on slope bases, lower slopes, in middle- to upper-slope coves. Soils are typically deep, fertile, moderately to well-drained and are often derived from calcareous parent materials, with textures including sands, loams, and silt loams. The canopy is dominated by Acer saccharum with Fraxinus americana, Liriodendron tulipifera, and Tilia americana being very characteristic. Associated canopy trees include Quercus rubra, Ostrya virginiana, Ulmus rubra, Acer rubrum, Betula alleghaniensis, Betula lenta, Fagus grandifolia, Juglans nigra, Carya cordiformis, and Prunus serotina. The shrub layer is of variable composition, characterized by Cornus alternifolia, Hamamelis virginiana, Asimina triloba, Lonicera canadensis, Rhododendron periclymenoides, and Viburnum acerifolium. Lindera benzoin is sparse to absent. The herb layer is diverse and made up of Adiantum pedatum, Asarum canadense, Actaea racemosa, Cardamine spp., Hepatica nobilis var. obtusa, Hydrophyllum virginianum, Elymus hystrix, Osmorhiza spp., Trillium grandiflorum, Viola spp., Dryopteris marginalis, Botrychium virginianum, Anemone quinquefolia, Geranium maculatum, Caulophyllum thalictroides, Sanguinaria canadensis, Claytonia virginica, Allium tricoccum, Cardamine concatenata, Arisaema triphyllum, and Laportea canadensis.

Diagnostic Characteristics: No Data Available

Rationale for Nominal Species or Physiognomic Features: No Data Available

Classification Comments: Despite considerable compositional variation, this unit appears to be a widespread and robust vegetation type. Damman and Kershner (1977) describe similar vegetation from gneissic areas of western Connecticut, with key species including Acer saccharum, Tilia americana, Fraxinus americana, Liriodendron tulipifera, Lindera benzoin, Carpinus caroliniana, Ulmus rubra, Carya cordiformis, Osmorhiza claytonii, Asarum canadense, Caulophyllum thalictroides, Hepatica nobilis var. obtusa, Galearis spectabilis, Viola pubescens, and Deparia acrostichoides. The Sugar Maple - Basswood - Tulip Poplar Community described by Martin (1975) from southeastern Kentucky, and the Acer saccharum - Liriodendron tulipifera - Fraxinus americana Community described by Andreu and Tukman (1995) from the Tellico Lake area of eastern Tennessee are similar, but not fully comparable because only woody vegetation was analyzed in these studies.

In extreme southwestern Virginia, this community type is gradational to ~Aesculus flava - Acer saccharum - (Tilia americana var. heterophylla) / Hydrophyllum canadense - Solidago flexicaulis Forest (CEGL007695)$$ of high-elevation coves in the Southern Appalachians. However, CEGL006237 may be distinguished by generally occurring at much lower elevations, having lower species richness, and lacking (or nearly lacking) a number of primarily southern species prominent in CEGL007695, including Actaea podocarpa, Aesculus flava, Hydrophyllum canadense, Phacelia fimbriata, Phlox stolonifera, Sanicula odorata, Stachys cordata, and Trillium sulcatum. A few occurring frequently in CEGL006237 (especially its high-elevation subtype), including Aconitum reclinatum, Betula alleghaniensis, Patis racemosa, and Sanicula trifoliata, are absent or uncommon in CEGL007695.

The exotic weed Alliaria petiolata is a rampant invader of some stands of this vegetation on the Northern Blue Ridge.

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

Floristics: The canopy is dominated by Acer saccharum with Fraxinus americana and Tilia americana being very characteristic. Associated canopy trees include Quercus rubra, Ostrya virginiana, Ulmus rubra, Acer rubrum, Betula alleghaniensis, Betula lenta, Fagus grandifolia, Juglans nigra, Liriodendron tulipifera, Magnolia acuminata, Carya cordiformis, and Prunus serotina. The shrub layer is of variable composition, characterized by Cornus alternifolia, Hamamelis virginiana, Lindera benzoin, Asimina triloba, Lonicera canadensis, Rhododendron periclymenoides, and Viburnum acerifolium. The herb layer is diverse and made up of Adiantum pedatum, Asarum canadense, Actaea racemosa, Cardamine spp., Hepatica nobilis var. obtusa, Hydrophyllum virginianum, Elymus hystrix, Osmorhiza spp., Trillium grandiflorum, Viola spp., Dryopteris marginalis, Botrychium virginianum, Anemone quinquefolia, Geranium maculatum, Caulophyllum thalictroides, Sanguinaria canadensis, Claytonia virginica, Allium tricoccum, Cardamine concatenata, Arisaema triphyllum, and Laportea canadensis. More eastern stands in Kentucky contain Aesculus flava, Aesculus glabra, or Tilia americana var. heterophylla (Campbell 2001). In 15 plot-sampled Virginia stands, Acer saccharum and Tilia americana (including both var. americana and var. heterophylla) are consistently the most important canopy trees in mixed stands with Fraxinus americana, Carya cordiformis, Quercus rubra, and Liriodendron tulipifera (lower elevations only). Minor canopy associates vary with site conditions and geography. South of the James River, Aesculus flava is an occasional canopy tree. On higher and cooler sites, Betula lenta, Fagus grandifolia, and Tsuga canadensis may be present. Juglans nigra and Ulmus rubra occur occasionally at lower elevations. Understory layers usually contain a good representation of the canopy species, particularly Acer saccharum. The shrub layer is typically sparse to absent and no shrub species attained a constancy >47% or mean cover >5% in plots. The herb layer is lush and often exhibits patch dominance by a small number of species, particularly the spring-flowering forbs Caulophyllum thalictroides and Osmorhiza claytonii. Other characteristic aestival herbs include Arisaema triphyllum, Asarum canadense, Dicentra spp., Galearis spectabilis, Hydrophyllum virginianum, Maianthemum racemosum, Podophyllum peltatum, Prosartes lanuginosa (= Disporum lanuginosum), Sanguinaria canadensis, Trillium grandiflorum, Uvularia grandiflora, and Viola canadensis. The summer aspect is often dominated by large colonies of Actaea racemosa, Impatiens pallida, and/or Laportea canadensis.

Dynamics:  No Data Available
Environmental Description:  This community type occupies cool (northwest- to east-facing), mesic, lower to middle slopes, ravines, and coves at elevations from 425 to about 1050 m (1400-3450 feet). Sites may be underlain by a number of bedrock types, including limestone, dolomite, metabasalt (greenstone), granitic rocks, and sandstone. Slopes are typically steep (mean in plots = 23°) and concave in at least one direction. Soils are deep, dark, and fertile, although frequently stony or bouldery. Samples collected from plots range from very strongly acidic to circumneutral (pH range = 4.2-6.8, mean pH = 5.3) but consistently have high calcium levels (mean = 1978 ppm) and moderately high magnesium and manganese levels.
Geographic Range: This forest is found in the High Alleghenies, Western Allegheny Plateau, Central Appalachians, and Cumberlands from New York and New Jersey south to West Virginia, Virginia, and eastern Kentucky.

Nations: US

States/Provinces:  KY, MD, NJ, NY, OH?, PA, VA, WV?


Confidence Level: Moderate

Confidence Level Comments: No Data Available
Grank: G4?

Greasons: No Data Available
Type Name Database Code Classification Code
Class 1 Forest & Woodland Class C01 1
Subclass 1.B Temperate & Boreal Forest & Woodland Subclass S15 1.B
Formation 1.B.2 Cool Temperate Forest & Woodland Formation F008 1.B.2
Division 1.B.2.Na Eastern North American Forest & Woodland Division D008 1.B.2.Na
Macrogroup 1.B.2.Na.3 Appalachian-Interior-Northeastern Mesic Forest Macrogroup M883 1.B.2.Na.3
Group 1.B.2.Na.3.a American Beech - Tuliptree - Yellow Buckeye Forest Group G020 1.B.2.Na.3.a
Alliance A0235 Tuliptree - Appalachian Basswood - Yellow Buckeye Forest Alliance A0235 1.B.2.Na.3.a
Association CEGL006237 Sugar Maple - White Ash - American Basswood - Tuliptree / Black Baneberry Forest CEGL006237 1.B.2.Na.3.a
Concept Lineage: No Data Available

Predecessors: No Data Available

Obsolete Names: No Data Available

Obsolete Parents: No Data Available
Synonomy: > Acer saccharum - Betula alleghaniensis / Acer pensylvanicum / Laportea canadensis - Angelica triquinata Forest (Fleming and Coulling 2001)
= Acer saccharum - Betula alleghaniensis / Caulophyllum thalictroides - Impatiens pallida - Laportea canadensis Forest (Young et al. 2007a)
> Acer saccharum - Tilia americana / Caulophyllum thalictroides - Laportea canadensis - Osmorhiza claytonii Forest (Fleming and Coulling 2001)
> Acer saccharum - Tilia americana / Laportea canadensis - Caulophyllum thalictroides - Deparia acrostichoides Forest (Coulling and Rawinski 1999)
> Acer saccharum var. saccharum - Tilia americana / Laportea canadensis - Caulophyllum thalictroides - Trillium grandiflorum Forest (type 1.3) (Fleming 1999)
> Liriodendron tulipifera - Acer saccharum - Tilia americana / Laportea canadensis - Impatiens pallida Association, pro parte (Rawinski et al. 1996)
< Sugar Maple - Basswood: 26 (Eyre 1980)
? Sugar maple-white ash-basswood cove forest (matrix/large patch) (CAP pers. comm. 1998)
Concept Author(s): G. Fleming and P. Coulling (2001)

Author of Description: G. Fleming and P. Coulling

Acknowledgements: No Data Available

Version Date: 09-28-01
  • Anderson, M., F. Biasi, and S. Buttrick. 1998. Conservation site selection: Ecoregional planning for biodiversity. The Nature Conservancy, Eastern Regional Office, Boston, MA. 18 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.
  • CAP [Central Appalachian Forest Working Group]. 1998. Central Appalachian Working group discussions. The Nature Conservancy, Boston, MA.
  • Campbell, J. 2001. Native vegetation types of Appalachian Kentucky. Unpublished report. The Nature Conservancy, Lexington, KY. 210 pp.
  • Coulling, P. P., and T. J. Rawinski. 1999. Classification of vegetation and ecological land units of the Piney River and Mt. Pleasant area, Pedlar Ranger District, George Washington and Jefferson National Forests, Virginia. Natural Heritage Technical Report 99-03, Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond.
  • Eastern Ecology Working Group of NatureServe. No date. International Ecological Classification Standard: International Vegetation Classification. Terrestrial Vegetation. NatureServe, Boston, MA.
  • 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.
  • Eyre, F. H., editor. 1980. Forest cover types of the United States and Canada. Society of American Foresters, Washington, DC. 148 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. 1999. Plant communities of limestone, dolomite, and other calcareous substrates in the George Washington and Jefferson national forests, Virginia. Natural Heritage Technical Report 99-4. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond. Unpublished report submitted to the USDA Forest Service. 218 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 K. D. Patterson. 2009b. Classification of selected Virginia montane wetland groups. In-house analysis, December 2009. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond.
  • Fleming, G. P., and K. Taverna. 2006. Vegetation classification for the National Capitol Region parks, western region. Regional (VA-WVA-MD-DC) analysis prepared for NatureServe and USGS-NPS Vegetation Mapping Program, March 2006. 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.
  • 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.
  • Lundgren, J. 2000. Lower New England - Northern Piedmont Ecoregion Forest Classification. The Nature Conservancy, Conservation Science, Boston, MA. 72 pp.
  • Martin, W. H. 1975. The Lilley Cornett Woods: A stable mixed mesophytic forest in Kentucky. Botanical Gazette 136:171-183.
  • 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.
  • Perles, S. J., G. S. Podniesinski, E. A. Zimmerman, W. A. Millinor, L. A. Sneddon. 2006a. Vegetation classification and mapping at Fort Necessity National Battlefield. Technical Report NPS/NER/NRTR--2006/038. National Park Service, Philadelphia, PA.
  • Rawinski, T. J., K. N. Hickman, J. Waller-Eling, G. P. Fleming, C. S. Austin, S. D. Helmick, C. Huber, G. Kappesser, F. C. Huber, Jr., T. Bailey, and T. K. Collins. 1996. Plant communities and ecological land units of the Glenwood Ranger District, George Washington and Jefferson national forests, Virginia. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage. Natural Heritage Technical Report 96-20. Richmond. 65 pp. plus appendices.
  • Young, J., G. Fleming, P. Townsend, and J. Foster. 2006. Vegetation of Shenandoah National Park in relation to environmental gradients. Final Report (v.1.1). Research technical report prepared for USDI, National Park Service. USGS/NPS Vegetation Mapping Program. 92 pp. plus appendices.
  • Young, J., G. Fleming, P. Townsend, and J. Foster. 2007a. Vegetation of Shenandoah National Park in relation to environmental gradients. Final Report, volume 1.1. Unpublished report submitted to the U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service. 103 pp. plus appendices and GIS products.
  • Young, J., G. Fleming, W. Cass, and C. Lea. 2009. Vegetation of Shenandoah National Park in relation to environmental gradients, Version 2.0. Technical Report NPS/NER/NRTR--2009/142. National Park Service, Philadelphia, PA. 389 pp.