Print Report
CEGL006638 Tsuga canadensis - Betula alleghaniensis - Acer saccharum / Dryopteris intermedia Forest
Type Concept Sentence: No Data Available
Common (Translated Scientific) Name: Eastern Hemlock - Yellow Birch - Sugar Maple / Intermediate Woodfern Forest
Colloquial Name: Hemlock - Northern Hardwood Forest
Hierarchy Level: Association
Type Concept: This association comprises hemlock - northern hardwood forests of the northeastern United States and adjacent maritime Canada. This forest is associated with cool, dry-mesic to mesic sites and acidic soils, often on rocky, north-facing slopes. Soils can have a thick, poorly decomposed duff layer over sandy loams. Tsuga canadensis is characteristic and usually dominant in the coniferous to mixed canopy. While hemlock generally forms at least 50% of the canopy, in some cases it may be as low as 25% relative dominance. Hardwood codominants include Betula alleghaniensis or Acer saccharum, with Fagus grandifolia common but not usually abundant in all but the very southern portion of the range of this type. Betula lenta may replace Betula alleghaniensis in some areas. Ostrya virginiana may be present as a small tree. Quercus spp. and Pinus strobus tend to be absent or, if present, only occur with low abundance. The shrub layer may be dense to fairly open and often includes Viburnum acerifolium and Acer pensylvanicum in addition to Tsuga canadensis regeneration. Herbs may be sparse, particularly in dense shade, but include Dryopteris intermedia, Medeola virginiana, Oxalis montana, Mitchella repens, Maianthemum canadense, Uvularia sessilifolia, Polystichum acrostichoides, Trientalis borealis, Huperzia lucidula, Oclemena acuminata, Dennstaedtia punctilobula, and Thelypteris noveboracensis. Nonvascular plants may be well-developed, often characterized by the liverwort Bazzania trilobata. Diagnostic characteristics of this forest are the dominance of Tsuga canadensis, presence of Betula alleghaniensis and Acer saccharum, and a lack of abundant Quercus spp., Pinus strobus, other conifers, or Betula lenta.
Diagnostic Characteristics: No Data Available
Rationale for Nominal Species or Physiognomic Features: No Data Available
Classification Comments: This type was formerly included in CEGL006109, which was split into CEGL006638 and CEGL006639. It was separated from ~Tsuga canadensis - Acer saccharum - Fagus grandifolia / Dryopteris intermedia Forest (CEGL006639)$$ to better recognize its Northern Appalachian - Acadian region characteristics, including much stronger dominance by Betula alleghaniensis. However, it may overlap strongly with ~Tsuga canadensis - (Betula alleghaniensis) - Picea rubens / Cornus canadensis Forest (CEGL006129)$$. See also another conifer-dominated association in this region, ~Pinus strobus - Tsuga canadensis - Picea rubens Forest (CEGL006324)$$. Stands of this vegetation type could become threatened by adelgid-caused tree mortality should the adelgid continue to spread northward.
Similar NVC Types: No Data Available
note: No Data Available
Physiognomy and Structure: No Data Available
Floristics: Tsuga canadensis is dominant and forms at least 50% of the canopy. Betula alleghaniensis can be codominant, with Fagus grandifolia and Acer saccharum common. The shrub layer may be dense to fairly open and often includes Viburnum acerifolium and Acer pensylvanicum in addition to Tsuga canadensis regeneration. Herbs may be sparse, particularly in dense shade, but often include Dryopteris intermedia, Medeola virginiana, Oxalis montana, Mitchella repens, Maianthemum canadense, Trientalis borealis, Huperzia lucidula (= Lycopodium lucidulum), and Thelypteris noveboracensis. Nonvascular plants may be well-developed, often characterized by the liverwort Bazzania trilobata. Diagnostic characteristics of this forest are the presence of Betula alleghaniensis and Acer saccharum and a lack of abundant Quercus spp., Pinus strobus, or Betula lenta.
Dynamics: No Data Available
Environmental Description: This forest is associated with cool, dry-mesic to mesic sites and acidic soils, often on rocky, north-facing slopes. Soils can have a thick, poorly decomposed duff layer over sandy loams.
Geographic Range: This community is generally distributed in large patches in the northeastern United States and adjacent maritime Canada.
Nations: US
States/Provinces: ME, NH, VT
Plot Analysis Summary:
http://vegbank.org/natureserve/ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.933897
Confidence Level: Moderate
Confidence Level Comments: No Data Available
Grank: G4G5
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.7 Sugar Maple - Yellow Birch - Eastern Hemlock Forest Macrogroup | M014 | 1.B.2.Na.7 |
| Group | 1.B.2.Na.7.g <i>Tsuga canadensis - Picea rubens - Betula alleghaniensis</i> Forest Group | G920 | 1.B.2.Na.7.g |
| Alliance | A4453 <i>Tsuga canadensis - Betula alleghaniensis - Picea rubens</i> Forest Alliance | A4453 | 1.B.2.Na.7.g |
| Association | CEGL006638 Eastern Hemlock - Yellow Birch - Sugar Maple / Intermediate Woodfern Forest | CEGL006638 | 1.B.2.Na.7.g |
Concept Lineage: No Data Available
Predecessors: No Data Available
Obsolete Names: No Data Available
Obsolete Parents: No Data Available
Synonomy: < Eastern Hemlock: 23 (Eyre 1980) [pro parte]
< Hemlock - Yellow Birch: 24 (Eyre 1980) [pro parte]
< Hemlock - Yellow Birch: 24 (Eyre 1980) [pro parte]
- Eastern Ecology Working Group of NatureServe. No date. International Ecological Classification Standard: International Vegetation Classification. Terrestrial Vegetation. NatureServe, Boston, MA.
- Eyre, F. H., editor. 1980. Forest cover types of the United States and Canada. Society of American Foresters, Washington, DC. 148 pp.
- Gawler, S. C. 2002. Natural landscapes of Maine: A guide to vegetated natural communities and ecosystems. Maine Natural Areas Program, Department of Conservation, Augusta, ME.
- Gawler, S. C., and A. Cutko. 2010. Natural landscapes of Maine: A classification of vegetated natural communities and ecosystems. Maine Natural Areas Program, Department of Conservation, Augusta.
- NAP [Northern Appalachian-Boreal Forest Working Group]. 1998. Northern Appalachian-Boreal Working group discussions. The Nature Conservancy, Boston, MA.
- NRCS [Natural Resources Conservation Service]. 2004a. Soil survey of Saratoga County, New York. USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service. 590 pp.
- Sperduto, D. D., and W. F. Nichols. 2004. Natural communities of New Hampshire: A guide and classification. New Hampshire Natural Heritage Bureau, DRED Division of Forests and Lands, Concord. 242 pp.
- Thompson, E. H., and E. R. Sorenson. 2005. Wetland, woodland, wildland: A guide to the natural communities of Vermont. The Nature Conservancy and the Vermont Department of Fish and Wildlife. University Press of New England, Hanover, NH. 456 pp.