Print Report
CEGL005226 Larix laricina / Chamaedaphne calyculata / Carex lasiocarpa Acidic Peatland
Type Concept Sentence: No Data Available
Common (Translated Scientific) Name: Tamarack / Leatherleaf / Woolly-fruit Sedge Acidic Peatland
Colloquial Name: Tamarack Scrub Poor Fen
Hierarchy Level: Association
Type Concept: This tamarack / ericaceous scrub poor fen is found in the northern Great Lakes region of the United States and into central Canada. Stands occur on peatlands with low exposure to minerotrophic groundwater including basin fens, shores above the level of the seasonal flooding, and larger peatlands. The water regime is saturated, and the substrate is fibric to mesic peat. The microtopography is low to intermediate hummocks with hollows. The vegetation is an open fen dominated by ericaceous shrubs, sedges, and Sphagnum spp. The scattered tree layer of Larix laricina and Picea mariana >2 m is less than 10%. The low-shrub layer is dominated by Betula pumila, Chamaedaphne calyculata, Larix laricina, Salix discolor, and Salix pedicellaris. The herb layer is somewhat low in diversity, with graminoids including the dominant Carex lasiocarpa, as well as Carex chordorrhiza and Carex limosa. Carex oligosperma may also occur. Forbs include Sarracenia purpurea, Maianthemum trifolium, and Menyanthes trifoliata. Mosses include Sphagnum capillifolium, Sphagnum fuscum and Sphagnum magellanicum. Diagnostic features include the ericaceous and tree scrub cover, the somewhat lower species diversity compared to richer fens, and Carex lasiocarpa more common than Carex oligosperma.
Diagnostic Characteristics: No Data Available
Rationale for Nominal Species or Physiognomic Features: No Data Available
Classification Comments: Type concept is that of a scrub poor fen, where tree height does not exceed 2 m, as defined by Poor Fen, Scrub Tamarack Subtype (MNNHP 1993), and the poor fen type (W20) in Harris et al. (1996) (with perhaps some elements of W22). Rangewide review is still needed. The type is similar to the Bog Birch - Leatherleaf Rich Fen, ~Betula pumila / Chamaedaphne calyculata / Carex lasiocarpa Fen (CEGL002494)$$, but is less rich, and contains substantially more minerotrophic indicators when compared to the Leatherleaf Poor Fen, ~Chamaedaphne calyculata - Ledum groenlandicum - Kalmia polifolia Bog (CEGL005278)$$.
Similar NVC Types: No Data Available
note: No Data Available
Physiognomy and Structure: No Data Available
Floristics: The vegetation is an open fen dominated by ericaceous shrubs, sedges, and Sphagnum. The scattered tree layer of Larix laricina and Picea mariana >2 m is less than 10%. The low-shrub layer is dominated by Betula pumila, Chamaedaphne calyculata, Larix laricina, Salix discolor, and Salix pedicellaris. The herb layer is somewhat low in diversity, with graminoids including the dominant Carex lasiocarpa, as well as Carex chordorrhiza and Carex limosa. Carex oligosperma may also occur. Forbs include Sarracenia purpurea, Maianthemum trifolium, and Menyanthes trifoliata. Mosses include Sphagnum capillifolium, Sphagnum fuscum and Sphagnum magellanicum. Diagnostic features include the ericaceous and tree scrub cover, the somewhat lower species diversity compared to richer fen, and Carex lasiocarpa more common than Carex oligosperma (Harris et al. 1996).
Dynamics: No Data Available
Environmental Description: Stands occur on peatlands with low exposure to minerotrophic groundwater including basin fens, shores above the level of the seasonal flooding, and larger peatlands. The water regime is saturated, and the substrate is fibric to mesic peat. The microtopography is low to intermediate hummocks with hollows (Harris et al. 1996).
Geographic Range: This tamarack and ericaceous scrub poor fen is found in the northern Great Lakes region of the United States and into central Canada, ranging from Minnesota into Ontario and elsewhere in Canada.
Nations: CA,US
States/Provinces: MI, MN, ON, QC?, WI
Plot Analysis Summary:
http://vegbank.org/natureserve/ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.688058
Confidence Level: Low
Confidence Level Comments: No Data Available
Grank: G4G5
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.2 Temperate to Polar Bog & Fen Formation | F016 | 2.C.2 |
| Division | 2.C.2.Na North American Bog & Fen Division | D029 | 2.C.2.Na |
| Macrogroup | 2.C.2.Na.1 Leatherleaf - Small Cranberry - Few-seed Sedge Bog & Acidic Fen Macrogroup | M876 | 2.C.2.Na.1 |
| Group | 2.C.2.Na.1.a Leatherleaf - Few-seed Sedge - Bog Laurel Boreal Bog & Acidic Fen Group | G748 | 2.C.2.Na.1.a |
| Alliance | A4398 Leatherleaf / Woolly-fruit Sedge Poor Fen Alliance | A4398 | 2.C.2.Na.1.a |
| Association | CEGL005226 Tamarack / Leatherleaf / Woolly-fruit Sedge Acidic Peatland | CEGL005226 | 2.C.2.Na.1.a |
Concept Lineage: No Data Available
Predecessors: No Data Available
Obsolete Names: No Data Available
Obsolete Parents: No Data Available
Synonomy: = Larix laricina / Chamaedaphne calyculata / Carex lasiocarpa Shrubland (Faber-Langendoen 2001) [Muskeg Poor Fen Scrub Subtype]
= Poor Fen, Scrub Tamarack Subtype (MNNHP 1993)
= Poor Fen, Scrub Tamarack Subtype (MNNHP 1993)
- CDPNQ [Centre de données sur le patrimoine naturel du Québec]. No date. Unpublished data. Centre de données sur le patrimoine naturel du Québec, Québec.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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]
- 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.
- ONHIC [Ontario Natural Heritage Information Centre]. 2018. Unpublished data. Ontario Natural Heritage Information Centre, Ministry of Natural Resources, Ontario, Canada.
- 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]