Print Report

CEGL006279 Tsuga canadensis / Rhododendron maximum / Sphagnum spp. Swamp Forest

Type Concept Sentence: No Data Available


Common (Translated Scientific) Name: Eastern Hemlock / Great Laurel / Peatmoss species Swamp Forest

Colloquial Name: Eastern Hemlock / Great Laurel Swamp Forest

Hierarchy Level:  Association

Type Concept: This hemlock swamp of the Central Appalachians, southeastern New York and northern New Jersey occurs on saturated acidic muck to imperfectly drained mineral soils in upland valleys, bedrock depressions, low slopes, and adjacent to streams and lakes. Mounds and depressions caused by uprooted trees are typical. The tree canopy is closed or nearly closed and is dominated by Tsuga canadensis with associates including Acer rubrum, Nyssa sylvatica, Pinus strobus, and Betula alleghaniensis. The well-developed shrub layer is strongly dominated by Rhododendron maximum. Other shrubs may include Ilex verticillata, Rhododendron viscosum, Vaccinium corymbosum, and Lindera benzoin. The sparse herb layer includes a variety of sedges such as Carex folliculata, Carex trisperma, Carex intumescens, as well as ferns and forbs such as Osmunda cinnamomea, Thelypteris palustris, Onoclea sensibilis, Maianthemum canadense, Cornus canadensis, Coptis trifolia, Symplocarpus foetidus, Trientalis borealis, and Calla palustris. The bryophyte layer is well-developed and strongly dominated by Sphagnum mosses. Other mosses may include Aulacomnium palustre, Hypnum imponens, and Leucobryum glaucum on drier hummocks.

Diagnostic Characteristics: No Data Available

Rationale for Nominal Species or Physiognomic Features: No Data Available

Classification Comments: No Data Available

Similar NVC Types: No Data Available
note: No Data Available

Physiognomy and Structure: No Data Available

Floristics: The tree canopy is closed or nearly closed (given healthy tress) and is dominated by Tsuga canadensis with associates including Acer rubrum, Nyssa sylvatica, Pinus strobus, and Betula alleghaniensis. (Actual foliar cover in stands where hemlocks are becoming defoliated due to hemlock woolly adelgid is much lower.) A subcanopy of Tsuga canadensis and Acer rubrum may be present. Mounds and depressions caused by uprooted trees are typical. The well-developed shrub layer is strongly dominated by Rhododendron maximum. Other shrubs may include Ilex verticillata, Rhododendron viscosum, Hamamelis virginiana, Vaccinium corymbosum, Lindera benzoin, and (in the northern part of the types range) Ilex mucronata (= Nemopanthus mucronatus). Herb cover varies from sparse to well-developed according to canopy closure and includes a variety of sedges such as Carex folliculata, Carex trisperma, Carex disperma, Carex intumescens, as well as ferns and forbs such as Osmunda cinnamomea, Osmunda regalis, Thelypteris palustris, Onoclea sensibilis, Maianthemum canadense, Lycopus uniflorus, Cornus canadensis, Coptis trifolia, Symplocarpus foetidus, Trientalis borealis, and Calla palustris. The bryophyte layer is well-developed and strongly dominated by Sphagnum mosses. Other mosses may include Aulacomnium palustre, Hypnum imponens, and Leucobryum glaucum on drier hummocks.

Dynamics:  No Data Available

Environmental Description:  This forest type occurs in saturated acidic muck to imperfectly drained mineral soils in upland valleys, bedrock depressions, low slopes, in small stream drainages, and adjacent to streams and lakes. The substrate is somewhat poorly to very poorly drained. Some areas are semipermanently to permanently flooded, especially where impacted by beaver or other impoundments, in which case the hemlocks may be in decline. The hemlocks may also be in decline due to hemlock woolly adelgid.

Geographic Range: This association is found in the northeastern United States from New York south to West Virginia and west to Ohio.

Nations: US

States/Provinces:  MD, NJ, NY, OH, PA, WV




Confidence Level: Low

Confidence Level Comments: No Data Available

Grank: G4?

Greasons: No Data Available


Concept Lineage: No Data Available

Predecessors: No Data Available

Obsolete Names: No Data Available

Obsolete Parents: No Data Available

Synonomy: = Tsuga canadensis / Rhododendron maximum / Sphagnum spp. Forest (Faber-Langendoen 2001)
? Hardwood-Conifer Swamp (Breden 1989)

Concept Author(s): Eastern Ecology Group/Central Appalachian Planning Team

Author of Description: S.C. Gawler

Acknowledgements: No Data Available

Version Date: 06-19-06

  • 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.
  • 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.
  • 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.
  • Eichelberger, B. 2011g. Pennsylvania Natural Heritage Program. Hemlock Palustrine Forest Factsheet. [http://www.naturalheritage.state.pa.us/Community.aspx?=16028] (accessed January 31, 2012)
  • 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.
  • 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.
  • Karlin, E. 1988. Report on New Jersey conifer swamp study. Unpublished report to the New Jersey Natural Heritage Program.
  • 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. Eastman, L. A. Sneddon, and S. C. Gawler. 2007. Classification and mapping of vegetation and fire fuel models at Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area. Technical Report NPS/NER/NRTR--2007/076. National Park Service, Philadelphia, PA. 2 volumes.
  • WVNHP [West Virginia Natural Heritage Program]. No date. Unpublished data. West Virginia Natural Heritage Program, Elkins.
  • 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]