Print Report

CEGL004187 Phragmites australis ssp. australis Tidal Ruderal Marsh

Type Concept Sentence: This community is a dense tall grassland indicative of disturbance, characterized by dense stands of Phragmites australis ssp. australis, an exotic taxon which tends to grow in colonies of tall, stout, leafy plants often to the exclusion of all other vascular plant species.

Common (Translated Scientific) Name: European Common Reed Tidal Ruderal Marsh

Colloquial Name: Ruderal Tidal Common Reed Marsh

Hierarchy Level:  Association

Type Concept: This community is a dense tall grassland indicative of disturbance. It occurs in a range of tidal wetland habitats from fresh to brackish in salinity. It is characterized by dense stands of Phragmites australis ssp. australis, an exotic taxon which tends to grow in colonies of tall, stout, leafy plants often to the exclusion of all other vascular plant species. Associated species are highly variable, depending on the community that has been invaded. Spreading in large colonies, Phragmites eventually dominates disturbed areas at coverage up to 100%. More typically, though, scattered individuals of other species may occur, such as sparse Morella cerifera shrubs, Kosteletzkya virginica, Calystegia sepium, Boehmeria cylindrica, Typha angustifolia, Apocynum cannabinum, Rosa palustris, Polygonum sp., and Mikania scandens. Vines of Toxicodendron radicans are also frequent, but typically occur at low cover. This community has a broad geographic range, including coastal areas of the eastern and southeastern United States and Canada.

Diagnostic Characteristics: No Data Available

Rationale for Nominal Species or Physiognomic Features: No Data Available

Classification Comments: Although Phragmites australis rhizomes have been noted in salt marsh sediments exceeding three thousand years in age (Niering and Warren 1977) and is thus a native component of salt marshes in some areas in North America, the growth of the species in its native condition was likely to have been significantly different than the dense monotypic stands that characterize this community in parts of its range today. The invasive, non-native strain has been labeled haplotype M (Saltonstall 2002). The presence of the Phragmites australis community in wetlands today generally indicates human-induced disturbance, either through direct habitat manipulation or through passive introduction of reproductive material to naturally disturbed substrates. Historically, without alteration, these sites would generally be more saline. In New England, Phragmites tends to invade behind artificial/man-made levees where regular salt input is blocked, making the sites more brackish and less saline than prior to levee construction and anthropogenic modification. In cases where Phragmites australis is a significant component of the vegetation but the vegetation retains sufficient species composition to retain its identity, the site is considered an unhealthy or degraded example of that original community. Where Phragmites australis cover is so high that native species have been excluded and the original community is no longer recognizable, the occurrence is treated as an example of ~Phragmites australis ssp. australis Tidal Ruderal Marsh (CEGL004187)$$.

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

Floristics: This community is a broadly defined reed grass marsh. It is characterized by dense stands of Phragmites australis ssp. australis, an exotic taxon which tends to grow in colonies of tall, stout, leafy plants often to the exclusion of all other vascular plant species. Associated species are highly variable, depending on the community that has been invaded. Spreading in large colonies, Phragmites eventually dominates disturbed areas at coverage up to 100%. More typically, though, scattered individuals of other species may occur, such as sparse Morella cerifera (= Myrica cerifera) shrubs, Kosteletzkya virginica, Calystegia sepium, Boehmeria cylindrica, Typha angustifolia, Apocynum cannabinum, Rosa palustris, Polygonum sp., and Mikania scandens. Vines of Toxicodendron radicans are also frequent but typically occur at low cover.

Dynamics:  No Data Available
Environmental Description:  This community is a dense tall grassland indicative of disturbance. It occurs in a range of tidal wetland habitats from fresh to brackish in salinity.
Geographic Range: This community has a broad geographic range, including coastal areas of the eastern and southeastern United States and Canada.

Nations: CA,US

States/Provinces:  AL, CT, DC?, DE, FL, GA, LA, LB?, MA, MD, ME, MS, NC, NF?, NH, NJ, NS?, NY, PA, PE?, QC?, RI, SC, TX, VA


Confidence Level: Moderate

Confidence Level Comments: No Data Available
Grank: GNA

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.90 Common Rush - Purple Loosestrife - Reed Canarygrass Eastern North American Ruderal Marsh, Wet Meadow & Shrubland Macrogroup M303 2.C.4.Nd.90
Group 2.C.4.Nd.90.b Reed Canarygrass - Common Reed - Narrowleaf Cattail Ruderal Wet Meadow & Marsh Group G556 2.C.4.Nd.90.b
Alliance A1431 European Common Reed Ruderal Marsh Alliance A1431 2.C.4.Nd.90.b
Association CEGL004187 European Common Reed Tidal Ruderal Marsh CEGL004187 2.C.4.Nd.90.b
Concept Lineage: merged

Predecessors: No Data Available

Obsolete Names: No Data Available

Obsolete Parents: No Data Available
Synonomy: = Phragmites australis Herbaceous Wetland (Fleming and Moorhead 1998)
= Phragmites australis Tidal Herbaceous Vegetation (Bowman 2000)
< Phragmites australis temporarily flooded grasslands (Metzler and Barrett 2006)
= Phragmites australis tidal marsh association (Clancy 1993b)
? Brackish Tidal Marsh (Rawinski 1984a) [formerly Southern New England and Gulf of Maine.]
Concept Author(s): Eastern Ecology Group

Author of Description: R.E. Zaremba and M. Pyne

Acknowledgements: No Data Available

Version Date: 10-21-15
  • Bell, R., M. Chandler, R. Buchsbaum, and C. Roman. 2002. Inventory of intertidal habitats: Boston Harbor Islands, a National Park area. Technical Report NPS/NERBOST/NRTR-2004/1. National Park Service, Northeast Region, Boston, MA. 13 pp.
  • Bowman, P. 2000. Draft classification for Delaware. Unpublished draft. Delaware Natural Heritage Program, Smyrna, DE.
  • Breden, T. F. 1989. A preliminary natural community classification for New Jersey. Pages 157-191 in: E. F. Karlin, editor. New Jersey''s rare and endangered plants and animals. Institute for Environmental Studies, Ramapo College, Mahwah, NJ. 280 pp.
  • CDPNQ [Centre de données sur le patrimoine naturel du Québec]. No date. Unpublished data. Centre de données sur le patrimoine naturel du Québec, Québec.
  • Clancy, K. 1993b. A preliminary classification of the natural communities of Delaware. Unpublished draft. Delaware Natural Heritage Inventory, Division of Parks and Recreation, Dover. 30 pp.
  • 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.
  • Edinger, G. J., A. L. Feldmann, T. G. Howard, J. J. Schmid, E. Eastman, E. Largay, and L. A. Sneddon. 2008a. Vegetation classification and mapping at Gateway National Recreation Area. Technical Report NPS/NER/NRTR--2008/107. National Park Service, Philadelphia, PA. 283 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.
  • Enser, R. W., and J. A. Lundgren. 2006. Natural communities of Rhode Island. A joint project of the Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management Natural Heritage Program and The Nature Conservancy of Rhode Island. Rhode Island Natural History Survey, Kingston. 40 pp. [www.rinhs.org]
  • Fleming, G. P., and W. H. Moorhead, III. 1998. Comparative wetlands ecology study of the Great Dismal Swamp, Northwest River, and North Landing River in Virginia. Natural Heritage Technical Report 98-9. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond. Unpublished report submitted to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 181 pp. plus appendices.
  • GNHP [Georgia Natural Heritage Program]. 2018. Unpublished data. Georgia Natural Heritage Program, Wildlife Resources Division, Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Social Circle.
  • 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.
  • Klopfer, S. D., A. Olivero, L. Sneddon, and J. Lundgren. 2002. Final report of the NPS Vegetation Mapping Project at Fire Island National Seashore. Conservation Management Institute, GIS & Remote Sensing Division, College of Natural Resources, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA. 193 pp.
  • Largay, E. F., and L. A. Sneddon. 2008. Vegetation classification and mapping at Saugus Iron Works National Historic Site. Technical Report NPS/NER/NRTR--2008/123. National Park Service, Philadelphia, PA. 111 pp.
  • Largay, E. F., and L. A. Sneddon. 2017. Vegetation mapping and classification of Boston Harbor Islands National Recreation Area. Technical Report NPS/NER/NRTR--2017/1529. National Park Service, Fort Collins, CO.
  • 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.
  • NRCS [Natural Resources Conservation Service]. 2001b. Soil survey of Gateway National Recreation Area, New York and New Jersey. USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service and USDI National Park Service, Gateway National Recreation Area in partnership with Cornell University Agricultural Experiment Station and New York City Soil and Water Conservation District.
  • NatureServe. 2009. Vegetation of the E.B. Forsythe National Wildlife Refuge. International Ecological Classification Standard: Terrestrial Ecological Classifications. NatureServe Central Databases. Arlington, VA. U.S.A. Data current as of 1 December 2009.
  • 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.
  • Niering, W. A., and R. S. Warren. 1977. Our dynamic tidal marshes: Vegetation changes as revealed by peat analysis. The Connecticut Arboretum Bulletin 22.
  • Odum, W. E., T. J. Smith, III, J. K. Hoover, and C. C. McIvor. 1984. The ecology of tidal freshwater marshes of the United States east coast: A community profile. FWS/OBS-83/17. USDI Fish & Wildlife Service, Office of Biological Services, Washington, DC. 176 pp.
  • Overholt, W. A., M. P. Sowinski, D. C. Schmitz, J. Schardt, V. Hunt, D. J. Larkin, and J. B. Fant. 2014. Early detection and rapid response to an exotic Phragmites population in Florida. Aquatics Magazine 36(3):5-7.
  • Patterson, K. D. 2008c. Vegetation classification and mapping at Colonial National Historical Park, Virginia. Technical Report NPS/NER/NRTR--2008/129. National Park Service, Philadelphia, PA. 369 pp.
  • Patterson, K. D. 2008d. Vegetation classification and mapping at George Washington Birthplace National Monument, Virginia. Technical Report NPS/NER/NRTR--2008/099. National Park Service, Philadelphia, PA. 231 pp.
  • Rawinski, T. 1984a. Natural community description abstract - southern New England calcareous seepage swamp. Unpublished report. The Nature Conservancy, Boston, MA. 6 pp.
  • Saltonstall, K. 2002. Cryptic invasion by a non-native genotype of the common reed, Phragmites australis, into North America. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 99:2445-2449.
  • 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. A., Zaremba, R. E., and M. Adams. 2010. Vegetation classification and mapping at Cape Cod National Seashore, Massachusetts. Natural Resources Technical Report NPS/NER/NRTR--2010/147. National Park Service, Philadelphia, PA. 481 pp. [http://biology.usgs.gov/npsveg/caco/cacorpt.pdf]
  • 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.
  • 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]
  • Swearingen, J., and K. Saltonstall. 2012. Phragmites field guide: Distinguishing native and exotic forms of common reed (Phragmites australis) in the United States. TN Plant Materials No. 56. USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service, Boise, ID. 23 pp. [http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_PLANTMATERIALS/publications/idpmctn11494.pdf]
  • 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.
  • Walz, K. S., K. H. Anderson, L. C. Kelly, A. G. Windisch, and M. C. Wong. 2008. New Jersey ecological community crosswalk: A tool for the identification of habitats across jurisdictional boundaries. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Parks and Forestry, Office of Natural Lands Management, Natural Heritage Program, Trenton.