Print Report

CEGL006304 Liriodendron tulipifera - Pinus strobus - Tsuga canadensis - Quercus rubra / Polystichum acrostichoides Forest

Type Concept Sentence: No Data Available

Common (Translated Scientific) Name: Tuliptree - Eastern White Pine - Eastern Hemlock - Northern Red Oak / Christmas Fern Forest

Colloquial Name: Central Appalachian Acidic Cove Forest (White Pine - Hemlock - Mixed Hardwoods Type)

Hierarchy Level:  Association

Type Concept: This mixed hardwood - white pine - hemlock cove forest is widely but locally distributed in the southern part of the Central Appalachians in Virginia, West Virginia, and Maryland. It occurs on the lower slopes and bottoms of ravines and coves at lower elevations, generally below 915 m (3000 feet). Sites may be underlain by bedrock or colluvial and alluvial deposits of various sedimentary and metasedimentary rocks, granitic rocks, or metabasalt. Habitats are generally mesic with acidic soils of moderate or intermediate fertility. The overstory is codominated by variable mixtures of Liriodendron tulipifera, Pinus strobus, Tsuga canadensis, Quercus rubra, and Quercus alba. This forest generally has a moderate to strong evergreen component, but Pinus strobus varies from widely scattered to codominant, and Tsuga canadensis has been greatly reduced by recent outbreaks of the hemlock woolly adelgid and may be restricted to the understory. Less frequent overstory associates include Acer rubrum, Betula lenta, Carya spp., Fagus grandifolia, Fraxinus americana, Nyssa sylvatica, and Quercus montana. Characteristic understory species include Acer pensylvanicum, Amelanchier arborea, Cercis canadensis, Cornus florida, Ostrya virginiana, Oxydendrum arboreum, Viburnum acerifolium, Rubus spp., Corylus americana, Hamamelis virginiana, Hydrangea arborescens, and Lindera benzoin. The herb layer is usually patchy to moderately dense. Frequent patch-dominants include Amphicarpaea bracteata, Dennstaedtia punctilobula, Eurybia divaricata, and Polystichum acrostichoides. Other constant but low-cover herbs include Botrychium virginianum, Desmodium nudiflorum, Dioscorea quaternata, Galium triflorum, Maianthemum racemosum ssp. racemosum, Mitchella repens, and Stellaria pubera. Many additional herbs occur at low constancy.

Diagnostic Characteristics: No Data Available

Rationale for Nominal Species or Physiognomic Features: No Data Available

Classification Comments: This association is represented by 35 Virginia plots, all of which have been analyzed in a statewide classification (>1300 plots) of montane upland forests and woodlands (Fleming and Patterson 2009b). Ten plots from the southern part of the Central Appalachians were classified as this association in the Appalachian Trail classification project (Fleming and Patterson 2009a).

In West Virginia, six plots in the Greenbrier Valley are classified to this association. Pinus strobus,Tsuga canadensis, and Quercus alba are constant canopy codominants. Liriodendron tulipifera is absent. Following a statewide analysis of hemlock-hardwood forests in 2017, plots previously classified as this association (CEGL006304) at Gauley River National Recreation Area (Vanderhorst et al. 2010) were reclassified as ~Tsuga canadensis - Fagus grandifolia - Acer saccharum / (Hamamelis virginiana, Kalmia latifolia) Forest (CEGL005043)$$.

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

Floristics: The overstory is codominated by variable mixtures of Liriodendron tulipifera, Pinus strobus, Tsuga canadensis, Quercus rubra, Quercus velutina, and Quercus alba. This forest generally has a moderate to strong evergreen component, but Pinus strobus varies from absent to widely scattered to codominant, and Tsuga canadensis has been greatly reduced in many areas by recent outbreaks of the hemlock woolly adelgid and may be restricted to the understory. Less frequent overstory associates include Acer rubrum, Betula lenta, Carya tomentosa (= Carya alba), Carya glabra, Fagus grandifolia, Fraxinus americana, Nyssa sylvatica, and Quercus montana (= Quercus prinus). The subcanopy is of variable cover and may include Acer pensylvanicum, Acer rubrum, Amelanchier arborea, Cercis canadensis, Cornus florida, Ostrya virginiana, Oxydendrum arboreum, Nyssa sylvatica, Pinus strobus, and Tsuga canadensis. The shrub layer is typically patchy or open and characterized by Viburnum acerifolium, Rubus spp., Corylus americana, Hamamelis virginiana, Hydrangea arborescens, Ilex opaca, and Lindera benzoin. The herb layer is usually patchy to moderately dense. Frequent patch-dominants include Amphicarpaea bracteata, Dennstaedtia punctilobula, Eurybia divaricata, and Polystichum acrostichoides. Other constant but low-cover herbs include Botrychium virginianum, Desmodium nudiflorum, Dioscorea quaternata, Galium triflorum, Maianthemum racemosum ssp. racemosum, Medeola virginiana, Mitchella repens, Stellaria pubera, Viola hastata, and Dryopteris intermedia.

Dynamics:  Compositional variation in Central Appalachian mesic cove forests is strongly correlated with variation in soil chemistry, particularly calcium, magnesium, and total base saturation levels. Analyses of extensive regional plot data indicate that this community type occupies an intermediate position on the soil fertility gradient, on sites with acidic, moderately infertile to moderately fertile substrates.
Environmental Description:  This community occurs at lower elevations, generally below 915 m (3000 feet), on the lower slopes and bottoms of ravines and coves. Sites may be underlain by bedrock or colluvial and alluvial deposits of various sedimentary or metasedimentary rocks, granitic rocks, or metabasalt. Habitats are generally mesic with acidic soils of moderate or intermediate fertility. Soils are mostly well-drained, dry to moist sandy loam, sandy clay loam, silt loam, loam, and silty clay.
Geographic Range: This community occurs in the southern portion of the Central Appalachians of Maryland, West Virginia, and Virginia. It is rare in the western Piedmont foothills of Virginia, adjacent to the Blue Ridge.

Nations: US

States/Provinces:  MD, OH, VA, WV


Confidence Level: High

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 A3304 Eastern Hemlock - Tuliptree Forest Alliance A3304 1.B.2.Na.3.a
Association CEGL006304 Tuliptree - Eastern White Pine - Eastern Hemlock - Northern Red Oak / Christmas Fern Forest CEGL006304 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: = Liriodendron tulipifera - Pinus strobus - Tsuga canadensis - Quercus (rubra, alba) / Polystichum acrostichoides Forest (Fleming and Taverna 2006)
= Quercus alba - Liriodendron tulipifera - Pinus strobus / Hepatica americana Forest (Young et al. 2007a)
= Tsuga canadensis - Pinus strobus - Fagus grandifolia / Polystichum acrostichoides Forest (Fleming and Coulling 2001)
> Tsuga canadensis - Pinus strobus - Quercus alba / Mitchella repens Forest [Greenbrier Valley Hemlock - White Pine Forest] (Vanderhorst 2017c)
< White pine-oak-tuliptree dry forest (CAP pers. comm. 1998)
Concept Author(s): L.A. Sneddon, M. Anderson, and K. Metzler

Author of Description: G.P. Fleming and S.C. Gawler

Acknowledgements: No Data Available

Version Date: 12-20-18
  • CAP [Central Appalachian Forest Working Group]. 1998. Central Appalachian Working group discussions. The Nature Conservancy, Boston, MA.
  • Eastern Ecology Working Group of NatureServe. No date. International Ecological Classification Standard: International Vegetation Classification. Terrestrial Vegetation. NatureServe, Boston, MA.
  • Fleming, G. P. 2002b. Preliminary classification of Piedmont & Inner Coastal Plain vegetation types in Virginia. Natural Heritage Technical Report 02-14. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond. 29 pp.
  • 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. 2003. Preliminary vegetation classification for the National Capitol Region parks. Regional (VA-WVA-MD-DC) analysis prepared for NatureServe and USGS-NPS Vegetation Mapping Program, March 2003. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond.
  • Fleming, G. P., and K. D. Patterson. 2009a. A vegetation classification for the Appalachian Trail: Virginia south to Georgia. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage. In-house analysis, March 2009.
  • 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.
  • 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.
  • Vanderhorst, J. 2017c. Wild vegetation of West Virginia: Upland hemlock hardwood forests. West Virginia Division of Natural Resources, Natural Heritage Program. [http://wvdnr.gov/Wildlife/Factsheets/Hemlock.shtm]
  • Vanderhorst, J. P., B. P. Streets, Z. Arcaro, and S. C. Gawler. 2010. Vegetation classification and mapping at Gauley River National Recreation Area. Technical Report NPS/NER/NRTR--2010/148. National Park Service, Philadelphia, PA.
  • 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.