Print Report

A3846 Phalaris arundinacea Western Ruderal Marsh Alliance

Type Concept Sentence: Stands are dominated by Phalaris arundinacea, which tends to occur in monocultures and is known to occur in mesic to wet disturbed areas and along rivers that no longer flood throughout the western U.S.

Common (Translated Scientific) Name: Reed Canarygrass Western Ruderal Marsh Alliance

Colloquial Name: Western Ruderal Reed Canarygrass Marsh

Hierarchy Level:  Alliance

Type Concept: This herbaceous alliance covers stands dominated by Phalaris arundinacea, which tends to occur in monocultures. Stands are found along riparian areas, pond and lake margins, wet meadows, and intermittent drainages, and is known from throughout the western U.S.

Diagnostic Characteristics: Stands dominated by Phalaris arundinacea, which tends to occur in monocultures.

Rationale for Nominal Species or Physiognomic Features: No Data Available

Classification Comments: This alliance covers non-native strains of the nominal species. Extensive planting as a forage crop has led to the spread of this semi-natural type (Hansen et al. 1995, Hall and Hansen 1997). Phalaris arundinacea is native and widespread in Alberta, although some introduced genotypes may be present. Further work is required to resolve the natural versus introduced nature of this type in western North America. Midwest and eastern North American stands are covered by groups and alliances for those geographic areas.

Similar NVC Types: No Data Available
note: No Data Available
Physiognomy and Structure: Tall herbaceous perennial graminoid that can reach heights >2 m tall.

Floristics: Stands are dominated by non-native strains of Phalaris arundinacea, which tends to occur in monocultures or associated with Calamagrostis canadensis in northern areas.

Dynamics:  No Data Available
Environmental Description:  This alliance occurs in wet areas, primarily riparian, occurring along rivers and streams, as well as shallow lakeshores (MacKenzie and Moran 2004, Willoughby et al. 2004). Elevations range from near sea level to 2307 m. The poorly drained alluvial soils are commonly fine-textured (occasionally coarse-textured) and may be flooded for brief to extended periods.
Geographic Range: This herbaceous alliance occurs throughout the western U.S. It also occurs in Canada, in the southern two-thirds of British Columbia, in areas with warm and relatively dry summers and in Alberta. Its distribution as a natural type is complicated because this native species is widely cultivated as a forage crop and has escaped and established in wetlands and riparian areas, displacing the local flora.

Nations: CA,US

States/Provinces:  AB, BC, CA, CO, ID, MT, ND, NM, NV, OR, UT, WA, WY


Confidence Level: Low

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.Nb Western North American Temperate Freshwater Marsh, Wet Meadow & Shrubland Division D031 2.C.4.Nb
Macrogroup 2.C.4.Nb.90 Western North American Ruderal Marsh, Wet Meadow & Shrubland Macrogroup M301 2.C.4.Nb.90
Group 2.C.4.Nb.90.a Kentucky Bluegrass - Canadian Horseweed - Canada Thistle Ruderal Marsh, Wet Meadow & Shrubland Group G524 2.C.4.Nb.90.a
Alliance A3846 Reed Canarygrass Western Ruderal Marsh Alliance A3846 2.C.4.Nb.90.a
Association CEGL001474 Reed Canarygrass Western Marsh CEGL001474 2.C.4.Nb.90.a
Concept Lineage: A.1381 split

Predecessors: No Data Available

Obsolete Names: No Data Available

Obsolete Parents: No Data Available
Synonomy: = Phalaris arundinacea Provisional Semi-Natural Stands (Reed canary grass grassland) (Buck-Diaz et al. 2012)
Concept Author(s): G. Kittel, in Faber-Langendoen et al. (2013)

Author of Description: G. Kittel

Acknowledgements: No Data Available

Version Date: 01-08-14
  • Boggs, K., P. Hansen, R. Pfister, and J. Joy. 1990. Classification and management of riparian and wetland sites in northwestern Montana. Draft version I. Report prepared for the Montana Riparian Association and Montana Forest and Conservation Experiment Station, School of Forestry, University of Montana, Missoula. 216 pp.
  • Buck-Diaz, J., S. Batiuk, and J. M. Evens. 2012. Vegetation alliances and associations of the Great Valley ecoregion, California. California Native Society, Sacramento, CA. [http://cnps.org/cnps/vegetation/pdf/great_valley_eco-vegclass2012.pdf]
  • Crawford, R. C. 2001. Initial riparian and wetland classification and characterization of the Columbia Basin in Washington. Prepared for Environmental Protection Agency and Bureau of Land Management, Spokane District. Washington Natural Heritage Program, Washington Department of Natural Resources, Olympia. 83 pp.
  • Faber-Langendoen, D., J. Drake, M. Hall, G. Kittel, S. Menard, C. Nordman, M. Pyne, M. Reid, M. Russo, K. Schulz, L. Sneddon, K. Snow, and J. Teague. 2013-2019b. Screening alliances for induction into the U.S. National Vegetation Classification: Part 1 - Alliance concept review. NatureServe, Arlington, VA.
  • Hall, J. B., and P. L. Hansen. 1997. A preliminary riparian habitat type classification system for the Bureau of Land Management districts in southern and eastern Idaho. Riparian and Wetland Research Program, School of Forestry, University of Montana. Idaho Bureau of Land Management, Technical Bulletin No. 97-11. 381 pp.
  • Hansen, P. L., R. D. Pfister, K. Boggs, B. J. Cook, J. Joy, and D. K. Hinckley. 1995. Classification and management of Montana''s riparian and wetland sites. Miscellaneous Publication No. 54. Montana Forest and Conservation Experiment Station, School of Forestry, University of Montana. 646 pp. plus posters.
  • Hansen, P., K. Boggs, and R. Pfister. 1991. Classification and management of riparian and wetland sites in Montana. Unpublished draft version prepared for Montana Riparian Association, Montana Forest and Conservation Experiment Station, School of Forestry, University of Montana, Missoula. 478 pp.
  • MacKenzie, W. H., and J. R. Moran. 2004. Wetlands of British Columbia: A guide to identification. Land Management Handbook No. 52. Research Branch, British Columbia Ministry of Forests and Lands, Victoria, BC. 287 pp.
  • Muldavin, E., P. Durkin, M. Bradley, M. Stuever, and P. Mehlhop. 2000a. Handbook of wetland vegetation communities of New Mexico. Volume I: Classification and community descriptions. Final report to the New Mexico Environment Department and the Environmental Protection Agency prepared by the New Mexico Natural Heritage Program, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.
  • Willoughby, M. G., C. Stone, C. Hincz, D. Moisey, G. Ehlert, and D. Lawrence. 2004. Guide to range plant community types and carrying capacity for the dry and central mixedwood subregions in Alberta. Fourth Approximation. Alberta Sustainable Resource Development, Public Lands and Forests Division, Edmonton, AB. 245 pp.