Natural Resources
Conservation Service

Ecological site F105XY012WI

Shallow Loamy-Silty Upland

Last updated: 2/23/2024
Accessed: 05/24/2026

Home / esd CATALOG / MLRA 105X / ecological site F105XY012WI

USC

Metric

General information

Provisional. A provisional ecological site description has undergone quality control and quality assurance review. It contains a working state and transition model and enough information to identify the ecological site.

MLRA notes

Major Land Resource Area (MLRA): 105X–Upper Mississippi River Bedrock Controlled Uplands and Valleys

The Northern Mississippi Valley Loess Hills area corresponds closely to the Western Coulees and Ridges and Southwest Savanna Ecological Landscapes. Some of the following brief overview is borrowed from the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources Ecological Landscape publication (2015).

Fifty-two percent of the Upper Mississippi River Bedrock Controlled Uplands and Valleys MLRA is in Wisconsin; Iowa, Minnesota, and Illinois contain the rest. This region is the only area in Wisconsin that has not been covered by glaciers within the past 2.4 million years. The Wisconsin portion of this MLRA is approximately 7.4 million acres (11,600 square miles). The landscape is characterized by dissected topography with deeply-incised, steep-walled valleys between bedrock controlled ridges.

Though it’s called the “Driftless Region”, some glacial drift is found in the major river valleys of this region in the form of outwash, deposited by proglacial streams of glacial meltwater. Wisconsin’s most recent glaciations also impacted the sediment of the area through the deposition of loess. After the glacier receded and before vegetation established, the bare surfaces of the glaciated areas were highly susceptible to wind erosion. As a result, a veneer of loess (wind-blown silt) was deposited over the entire region. The thickest deposits—nearly five meters—are on ridges near the Mississippi River and gradually thin moving eastward. The loess caps in Dane and Green counties are generally 0.5-1.5 meters deep. Much of the loess has eroded downslope and collected in floodplains.

Bedrock is shallow throughout this MLRA and is a major influence on topography and hydrology. Most of the MLRA has bedrock within two meters, except in the deep river valleys that are filled with outwash and alluvium materials. Sandstone is the dominant bedrock type in MLRA 105, but the southernmost portion is dominated by dolomite. Military Ridge is an escarpment that straddles the boundary between sandstone and dolomite bedrock. The sandstone north of the ridge is weaker than the erosion-resistant dolomite south of the ridge. The sandstone is deeply cut and dissected into steep slopes and valleys. The dolomite-controlled ridges tend to be less dissected and broader with more gentle, south sloping topography. Geomorphic and fluvial processes formed these landscapes by way of sheet wash, soil creep, and flowage. These processes eroded the hillslopes, cut into bedrock, and transported the debris to streams, forming floodplains and terraces.

Underfit streams are common in MLRA 105, especially in the southern portion. These streams currently occupy large river valleys—especially those of the Black, Chippewa, Mississippi, and Wisconsin Rivers—that were carved by proglacial meltwater streams carrying much larger quantities of water than what’s present today. As the climate dried, waterflow decreased and the valleys filled with alluvial sediment. Narrow meanders were formed by the shrinking streams and are often dissimilar to the meanders of the larger valleys they occupy. Fluvial landforms – including terraces, oxbow lakes, sandbars, eroding bluffs, and large floodplain complexes – are found within these large valleys and are subject to varying flooding frequencies, intensities, and durations.
Karst topography formed in this region from dissolution of carbonate bedrock by surface and groundwater. Dolomite and limestone are more easily affected by dissolution, but karst topography also formed in sandstone. Erosion by water (stream meanders, rain/runoff, and groundwater), wind, and frost weaken joints and bedding planes that can cause collapse. In addition, sandstone materials collapse into cavities in underlying dolomite or limestone.

Historically, MLRA 105 was dominated by oak forests and oak openings making up more than 50% of the area. Prairies were significant and covered 32% of the area south of Military Ridge. Maple-basswood forests covered 19% of the area north of Military Ridge. Dominant tree species were white oak (Quercus alba), bur oak (Quercus macrocarpa), black oak (Quercus velutina), and sugar maple (Acer saccharum).

Classification relationships

Relationship to Established Framework and Classification Systems:

Habitat Types of S. Wisconsin (Kotar, 1996): Acer saccharum-Tilia/Cornus racemose(Arismaea) [ATiCr(As)], Acer saccharum-Tilia/Desmodium [ATiDe], Acer saccharum-Tilia/Arismaea(Desmodium) [ATiAs(De)], Acer saccharum-Acer rubrum/Viburnum [AArVb], and Pinus strobus/Vaccinium-Hammamelis [PVHa].

Biophysical Settings (Landfire, 2014): This ES is largely mapped as North-Central Interior Maple-Basswood Forest, North-Central Interior Dry-Mesic Oak Forest and Woodland, North-Central Interior Dry Oak Forest and Woodland, and Paleozoic Plateau Bluff and Talus Woodland

WDNR Natural Communities (WDNR, 2015): This ES is most similar to Southern Mesic Forest as described by the Wisconsin DNR.

Hierarchical Framework Relationships:

Major Land Resource Area (MLRA): Upper Mississippi River Bedrock Controlled Uplands and Valleys (105)

USFS Subregions: Menominee Eroded Pre-Wisconsin Till (222La), Melrose Oak Forest and Savannah (222Lb), Mississippi-Wisconsin River Ravines (222Lc), Kickapoo-Wisconsin River Ravines (222Ld), Mineral Point Prairie-Savannah (222Le)

Wisconsin DNR Ecological Landscapes: Western Coulee and Ridges, Southwest Savannah

Ecological site concept

The Shallow Loamy-Silty Upland ecological site occupies approximately 1,443,000 acres in MLRA 105, or about 21% of total land area. It is the second-most extensive ecological site in MLRA 105 behind Loamy Silty Uplands. It is found in upland positions across diverse landforms throughout MLRA 105.

These sites are characterized by moderately well to well drained loamy soils. Bedrock contact is found within 3 feet (1 meter) of the soil surface. The bedrock acts as a root restricting layer and can limit root growth and perch water. These sites may be vulnerable to tree trips.

Associated sites

F105XY008WI	Moist Loamy-Clayey Lowland These sites form in loamy and clayey materials. They are somewhat poorly drained. They can sometimes be found adjacent to Shallow Loamy-Silty Upland in lower landscape positions.
F105XY003WI	Wet Loamy-Clayey Floodplain These sites form in deep, loamy alluvium deposits along floodplains, especially those along smaller tributaries to the Chippewa, Black, and Wisconsin rivers. They support vegetation tolerant of seasonal flooding. They are sometimes saturated enough for hydric conditions to occur. They can e found in floodplains adjacent to Shallow Loamy-Silty Upland.

F105XY008WI

Moist Loamy-Clayey Lowland

These sites form in loamy and clayey materials. They are somewhat poorly drained. They can sometimes be found adjacent to Shallow Loamy-Silty Upland in lower landscape positions.

F105XY003WI

Wet Loamy-Clayey Floodplain

These sites form in deep, loamy alluvium deposits along floodplains, especially those along smaller tributaries to the Chippewa, Black, and Wisconsin rivers. They support vegetation tolerant of seasonal flooding. They are sometimes saturated enough for hydric conditions to occur. They can e found in floodplains adjacent to Shallow Loamy-Silty Upland.

Similar sites

F105XY013WI	Loamy-Silty Upland These sites form in loamy to silty materials, often silty loess and residuum. They are moderately well to well drained. They are very similar to Shallow Loamy-Silty Upland but lack bedrock contact within one meter of the soil surface.
R105XY010WI	Shallow Mollic Loamy-Silty Upland These sites form in loamy to silty materials, often silty loess and residuum. They have deep, dark surfaces and bedrock contact within one meter of the soil surface. They are well drained to somewhat excessively drained. They are very similar to Shallow Loamy-Silty Upland but have deeper surface horizons of organic-enriched soil (mollic rather than ochric epipedons).
F105XY015WI	Shallow Clayey Upland These sites form in sandy materials deposited by wind, water, gravity, or weathered from sandstone bedrock. They have bedrock contact within one meter of the soil surface. They are somewhat excessively to excessively drained. They are found in similar landscape positions as Shallow Loamy-Silty Upland but have coarser soil textures with a lower nutrient status.

F105XY013WI

Loamy-Silty Upland

These sites form in loamy to silty materials, often silty loess and residuum. They are moderately well to well drained. They are very similar to Shallow Loamy-Silty Upland but lack bedrock contact within one meter of the soil surface.

R105XY010WI

Shallow Mollic Loamy-Silty Upland

These sites form in loamy to silty materials, often silty loess and residuum. They have deep, dark surfaces and bedrock contact within one meter of the soil surface. They are well drained to somewhat excessively drained. They are very similar to Shallow Loamy-Silty Upland but have deeper surface horizons of organic-enriched soil (mollic rather than ochric epipedons).

F105XY015WI

Shallow Clayey Upland

These sites form in sandy materials deposited by wind, water, gravity, or weathered from sandstone bedrock. They have bedrock contact within one meter of the soil surface. They are somewhat excessively to excessively drained. They are found in similar landscape positions as Shallow Loamy-Silty Upland but have coarser soil textures with a lower nutrient status.

Table 1. Dominant plant species

Tree	(1) Acer saccharum (2) Fraxinus americana
Shrub	Not specified
Herbaceous	(1) Parthenocissus quinquefolia (2) Circaea ×intermedia

Download full description

Physiographic features

These sites are found on hills, ridges, and valley sides in the summit, shoulder, or backslope position. Slope shape is convex or linear. Slopes range from 1 to 60 percent. Elevation of the landform ranges from 705 to 1001 feet (215 to 305 meters) above sea level.

These sites are not subject to inundation by water. The seasonally high water table is generally found below 24 inches (61 cm) from the soil surface. Runoff potential is low to very high.

Table 2. Representative physiographic features

Hillslope profile	(1) Summit (2) Shoulder (3) Backslope
Slope shape across	(1) Convex
Slope shape up-down	(1) Linear
Landforms	(1) Hill (2) Ridge (3) Valley side
Runoff class	Low to very high
Flooding frequency	None
Ponding frequency	None
Elevation	705 – 1001 ft
Slope	1 – 60 %
Water table depth	24 – 34 in
Aspect	Aspect is not a significant factor

Climatic features

The climate of the Upper Mississippi River Bedrock Controlled Uplands and Valleys MLRA is typical of southern Wisconsin, with warmer winters, warmer summers, and higher precipitation rates than MLRA in northern Wisconsin. The MLRA stretches over about 2.9 degrees of latitude, or nearly 200 miles, from its northern tip in Barron county to its southern Wisconsin extent on the border of Illinois. This results in considerable variation in climate throughout the MLRA. The growing season ranges from 117 to 181 growing degree days, with longer growing seasons in the southern portion.

The average annual precipitation for this ecological site is 35 inches. The average annual snowfall is 42 inches. The annual average maximum and minimum temperatures are 56°F and 35°F, respectively.

Table 3 Representative climatic features

Frost-free period (characteristic range)	120-120 days
Freeze-free period (characteristic range)	140-150 days
Precipitation total (characteristic range)	30-40 in
Frost-free period (actual range)	110-120 days
Freeze-free period (actual range)	130-150 days
Precipitation total (actual range)	30-40 in
Frost-free period (average)	120 days
Freeze-free period (average)	140 days
Precipitation total (average)	40 in

Characteristic range

Actual range

Bar

Line

Figure 1. Monthly precipitation range

Characteristic range

Actual range

Bar

Line

Figure 2. Monthly minimum temperature range

Characteristic range

Actual range

Bar

Line

Figure 3. Monthly maximum temperature range

Bar

Line

Figure 4. Monthly average minimum and maximum temperature

Figure 5. Annual precipitation pattern

Figure 6 Annual average temperature pattern

Climate stations used

(1) HILLSBORO [USC00473654], Elroy, WI
(2) RIDGELAND 1 NNE [USC00477174], Dallas, WI
(3) MONDOVI [USC00475563], Mondovi, WI
(4) MENOMONIE [USC00475335], Menomonie, WI
(5) DODGEVILLE [USC00472173], Dodgeville, WI
(6) ARGYLE [USC00470287], Argyle, WI
(7) REEDSBURG [USC00477052], Reedsburg, WI

Influencing water features

Water is received through precipitation and runoff from adjacent uplands. Water is lost from the site primarily through runoff, evapotranspiration, and groundwater recharge.<br />
<br />
Permeability of the soils is impermeable to moderately slow. The hydrologic soil groups for these sites are B, C, and D.

Wetland description

Hydrogeomorphic Wetland Classification: None<br />
Cowardin Wetland Classification: None

Soil features

This site is represented by the Baraboo, Derinda, Dobie, Eleva, Elevasil, Elkmound, Gale, Hayriver, Hiles, Hixton, Humbird, La Farge, Mifflin, Newglarus, Norden, Northfield, Urne soil series, and by a variant of the Mifflin series. Hapludalfs make up 82% of the acreage of this site. Eutrudepts make up 11% of the acreage. The remaining acreage is made up of Dystrudepts, Glossudalfs, and a very small amount of Haplorthods.

These soils formed in silty, loamy, or clayey deposits of loess, colluvium, till, or pedisediment, and in sandy to loamy residuum weathered from sandstone and shale. They have bedrock contact within 39 inches (100 cm) from the soil surface. Subsurface fragments smaller than 3 inches in diameter (gravel) may occupy up to 14% volume. Larger fragments may occupy up to 30% volume. These fragments may be mixed, unstratified rocks (in the case of till), or fragments of weathered sandstone, limestone, or dolostone bedrock. The soils are moderately well to well drained. They do not meet hydric soil requirements.

Soils are extremely acid to neutral. Some soils may have accumulations of secondary carbonates.

Table 4. Representative soil features

Parent material	(1) Alluvium (2) Residuum (3) Loess (4) Pedisediment (5) Drift
Surface texture	(1) Silt loam (2) Loam (3) Silty clay loam (4) Sandy loam
Drainage class	Moderately well drained to well drained
Permeability class	Moderately slow
Soil depth	12 – 39 in
Surface fragment cover <=3"	0 – 6 %
Surface fragment cover >3"	0 – 7 %
Available water capacity (0-59.1in)	0.79 – 3.12 in
Calcium carbonate equivalent (0-39.4in)	0 – 10 %
Soil reaction (1:1 water) (0-39.4in)	4 – 6.7
Subsurface fragment volume <=3" (0-39.4in)	0 – 14 %
Subsurface fragment volume >3" (0-39.4in)	0 – 30 %

Ecological dynamics

Historically, this site was dominated by mesic hardwoods in a landscape adapted to fire disturbance that allowed for a strong presence of oaks. In pre-European settlement time wildfire was the main controlling factor of forest community dynamics. Following a severe, stand-replacing fire, any of the species present on the landscape could become established, depending on seed source availability and specific conditions of post-fire seedbed. The newly established young stands of any species were easily eliminated by recurring fires, but differences in fire-resisting properties among the species began to play a role in any species’ survival success. Many pine and oak species were dominant in the region because of their fire-resistant properties and successful regeneration post-fire. With clear cutting and continued fire suppression, many of these species adapted to fire and intolerant of shade are replaced by other species. Species such as white pine and red oak are still common on the landscape based on their tolerance to some shade; these species to establish under a canopy, and in time, may become a component of the canopy. Mesic hardwoods are sensitive to fire, but in its absence, the have the ability to dominate sites based on their shade tolerance and prolific seed production.

Today, these forests most commonly include stands of red oak, white oak, and other mesic hardwoods may be present as well. Some sites have a the likely reference community of sugar maple and basswood with a mixture of ashes. These sites have the conditions to support shade tolerant mesic hardwoods, but historically had significant wind throw and fire disturbance that allowed for a strong presence of oak species. As long as fire is continually suppressed, maples and other mesic hardwoods will continue to dominate the canopy.

State and transition model

More interactive model formats are also available. View Interactive Models
Click on state and transition labels to scroll to the respective text

Ecosystem states

1. Reference State

2. Early to Mid-Successional Forest State

3. Agricultural State

T1A	-	Stand replacing disturbance that includes fire.
T1B	-	Removal of forest cover and tilling for agricultural crop production.
R2A	-	Deciduous forest community is slowly taken over by shade tolerant maples and other species.
T2A	-	Removal of forest cover and tilling for agricultural crop production.
R3A	-	Cessation of agricultural practices leads to natural reforestation, or site is replanted.
R3B	-	Cessation of agricultural practices leads to natural reforestation, or site is replanted.

State 1 submodel, plant communities

1.1. Advanced Succession Community

1.2. Rejuvenated Community Phase

1.1A	-	Light to moderate intensity fires, blow-downs, ice storms.
1.2A	-	Disturbance-free period for 30+ years.

State 2 submodel, plant communities

2.1. Aspen-Paper Birch Phase

2.2. Red Oak-Red Maple

2.3. Mixed Oak Forest

2.1A	-	Immigration and establishment of red oak and red maple.
2.2A	-	Immigration and establishment of red oak and red maple.
2.3A	-	Clear cutting or stand-replacing fire.

State 1
Reference State

Reference state is a forest community dominated by sugar maple (Acer saccharum) with American basswood (Tilia americana), and a mixture of Ashes (Fraxinus spp.), and Oaks (Quercus spp.). Depending on history of disturbance, two community phases can be distinguished largely by differences in dominance of tree species and community age structure. In some places sugar maple seed source may be missing leading to other dominant canopy species.

Community 1.1
Advanced Succession Community

In the absence of any major disturbance, specifically fire, this community is dominated by Sugar maple. Common associates include American basswood, Ashes, and Oaks. Other species may be present in the canopy as well, including: Black Cherry, Red maple, and Shagbark hickory. The shrub layer is typically not well developed in this phase, but is likely to contain regenerating overstory species. The ground layer is often sparse but includes rich site species such as Virginia creeper, Enchanter’s nightshade, and Pointedleaf Ticktrefoil.

Dominant plant species

sugar maple (Acer saccharum), tree
white ash (Fraxinus americana), tree
American basswood (Tilia americana), tree
Virginia creeper (Parthenocissus quinquefolia), other herbaceous
enchanter's nightshade (Circaea ×intermedia), other herbaceous
pointedleaf ticktrefoil (Desmodium glutinosum), other herbaceous

Community 1.2
Rejuvenated Community Phase

This community is dominated by a mixture of hardwoods including sugar maple, basswood, red oak, white oak, and ashes. Associates may include shagbark hickory, and black cherry. The shrub (often more developed in this phase) and ground layers are similar to the advanced succession phase, but may include the establishment of new seedlings to include more shade intolerant species. This community phase will quickly return to the mature or advanced succession phase with limited disturbance.

Dominant plant species

sugar maple (Acer saccharum), tree
northern red oak (Quercus rubra), tree
white oak (Quercus alba), tree
American basswood (Tilia americana), tree
chokecherry (Prunus virginiana), shrub
currant (Ribes), shrub
Jack in the pulpit (Arisaema triphyllum), other herbaceous
pointedleaf ticktrefoil (Desmodium glutinosum), other herbaceous

Pathway 1.1A
Community 1.1 to 1.2

Light intensity fires, crown breakage from ice and snow and small scale blow-downs create canopy openings, allowing gap regeneration of less shade tolerant species such as white ash, red oak, and white oak. These species may join the canopy composition.

Pathway 1.2A
Community 1.2 to 1.1

A long period without major canopy disturbance allows gradual replacement of oldest canopy trees by younger cohorts. Lacking a major disturbance, the canopy will likely be replaced primarily with sugar maple. Small scale disturbances may still occur periodically, but once second or third canopies are established there is minimal new regeneration taking place and the forest gradually returns to mature state.

State 2
Early to Mid-Successional Forest State

Following disturbances described in Transition T1A a wide range of forest community phases may come into temporary existence, the three most common ones are described here. The mixed oak forest phase represents an alternative stable state in the absence of seed source of the dominant mesic hardwoods. The mixed oak forest phase may persistent with either consistent windthrow or frequent fire or both.

Dominant plant species

quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides), tree
paper birch (Betula papyrifera), tree
red maple (Acer rubrum), tree

Community 2.1
Aspen-Paper Birch Phase

These two species have a very narrow window of environmental and ecological conditions for successful establishment. Main requirements are exposed mineral soil and elimination, most effectively by fire, of on-site seed sources of potential competing vegetation. In addition, adequate soil moisture must be available for initial seedling development. Once seedlings are firmly established, height growth of both species is relatively rapid and able to outgrow most competitive species. Paper birch seedlings and saplings tolerate partial shade and often become members of mixed species communities. This is not true for aspen which requires continuous full-sun exposure for survival. Aspen stands are initially very dense due to sprouting from extensive lateral roots, but rapid natural thinning ensues as stems compete for available light.

Dominant plant species

quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides), tree
paper birch (Betula papyrifera), tree

Community 2.2
Red Oak-Red Maple

This community phase occurs by invading and succeeding a pioneer aspen-birch community.

Dominant plant species

northern red oak (Quercus rubra), tree
red maple (Acer rubrum), tree

Community 2.3
Mixed Oak Forest

Stand structure consists of dominant white oak, red oak and red maple in combination with a modest, or strong presence of mature, or decaying, aspen and/or paper birch. A wide variety of tree species may be present with white oak, red oak and red maple in the canopy (Black cherry, Hickory, Ashes). The shrub layer typically reaches its best development in this community phase. Depending on seed source, sugar maple has become established and a young cohort exists in the subcanopy. If sugar maple seeds are not present and/or there is frequent disturbance (fire or windthrow) the site may persist in this state/phase for a long time.

Dominant plant species

northern red oak (Quercus rubra), tree
white oak (Quercus alba), tree
sugar maple (Acer saccharum), tree
chokecherry (Prunus virginiana), shrub
black cherry (Prunus serotina), shrub
beaked hazelnut (Corylus cornuta), shrub
gray dogwood (Cornus racemosa), shrub
geranium (Geranium), other herbaceous

Pathway 2.1A
Community 2.1 to 2.2

Time and the immigration, establishment, and growth of red oak and white oak seedlings. These moderately shade tolerant species seed in beneath the aspen and birch and eventually outcompete these intolerant species.

Pathway 2.2A
Community 2.2 to 2.3

Time and natural succession. Red oak and red maple have succeeded the aspen-birch community. Depending on seed source, sugar maple begins growth and establishment in the understory.

Pathway 2.3A
Community 2.3 to 2.1

Clear cutting or major fire disturbance allows for the reinvasion of the shade intolerant aspen-birch community.

State 3
Agricultural State

Indefinite period of applying agricultural practices.

Transition T1A
State 1 to 2

Transition T1A – Major stand-replacing disturbance. In pre-European settlement time, the event was most often a severe blow down, sometimes followed by fires. Such blow downs have been estimated to occur in this part of Wisconsin every 300 to 400 years (Schulte and Mladenoff, 2005). In post settlement virtually every acre has been logged either by clear cutting or successive cuts targeting species marketable at that time. Post logging slash fires also have been a significant factor in most areas. These disturbances created the environment suitable for natural regeneration of many shade-intolerant species and for commercial planting.

Transition T1B
State 1 to 3

Removal of forest cover, tilling and application of other agricultural techniques to grow agricultural crops.

Restoration pathway R2A
State 2 to 1

A period of some 70-100 years without major stand disturbance, especially fire, leads to decreased presence, through natural mortality, of early successional species and the dominance of shade tolerant sugar maple with less tolerant associates of red oak and white ash, returning the community to Reference State.

Transition T2A
State 2 to 3

Removal of forest cover, tilling and application of other agricultural techniques to grow agricultural crops.

Restoration pathway R3A
State 3 to 1

Abandonment of agricultural practices and allowing natural vegetation to colonize the site or apply artificial afforestation. The time required for forest community to reach the reference state conditions may exceed 100 years.

Restoration pathway R3B
State 3 to 2

Cessation of agricultural practices leads to natural reforestation, or site is replanted.

Additional community tables

Table 5. Community 1.1 plant community composition

Group	Common name	Symbol	Scientific name	Annual production ()	Foliar cover (%)

Table 6. Community 1.2 plant community composition

Group	Common name	Symbol	Scientific name	Annual production ()	Foliar cover (%)

Table 7. Community 2.1 plant community composition

Group	Common name	Symbol	Scientific name	Annual production ()	Foliar cover (%)

Table 8. Community 2.2 plant community composition

Group	Common name	Symbol	Scientific name	Annual production ()	Foliar cover (%)

Table 9. Community 2.3 plant community composition

Group	Common name	Symbol	Scientific name	Annual production ()	Foliar cover (%)

Supporting information

Inventory data references

Plot and other supporting inventory data for site identification and community phases is located on a NRCS North Central Region shared and one drive folder. University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point described soils, took photographs, and inventoried vegetation data at community phases within the reference state. The data sources include WI ESD Plot Data Collection Form - Tier 2, Releve Method, NASIS pedon description, NRCS SOI 036, photographs, and Kotar Habitat Types.

Other references

Cleland, D.T.; Avers, P.E.; McNab, W.H.; Jensen, M.E.; Bailey, R.G., King, T.; Russell, W.E. 1997. National Hierarchical Framework of Ecological Units. Published in, Boyce, M. S.; Haney, A., ed. 1997. Ecosystem Management Applications for Sustainable Forest and Wildlife Resources. Yale University Press, New Haven, CT. pp. 181-200.

Curtis, J.T. 1959. Vegetation of Wisconsin: an ordination of plant communities. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison. 657 pp.

Finley, R. 1976. Original vegetation of Wisconsin. Map compiled from U.S. General Land Office notes. U.S. Forest Service, North Central Forest Experiment Station, St. Paul, Minnesota.

NatureServe. 2018. International Ecological Classification Satandard: Terrestrial Ecological Classifications. NautreServe Centreal Databases. Arlington, VA. U.S.A. Data current as of 28 August 2018.

Kotar, J., J. A. Kovach, and T. L. Burger. 2002. A Guide to Forest Communities and Habitat Types of Northern Wisconsin. Second edition. University of Wisconsin-Madison, Department of Forest Ecology and Management, Madison.

Kotar, J., J. A. Kovach, and T. L. Burger. 1996. A Guide to Forest Communities and Habitat Types of Southern Wisconsin. University of Wisconsin-Madison, Department of Forest Ecology and Management, Madison.

Kotar, J., and T. L. Burger. 2017. Wetland Forest Habitat Type Classification System for Northern Wisconsin: A Guide for Land Managers and landowners. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, PUB-FR-627 2017, Madison.
Schulte, L.A., and D.J. Mladenoff. 2001. The original U.S. public land sur¬vey records: their use and limitations in reconstructing pre-European settlement vegetation. Journal of Forestry 99:5–10.

Schulte, L.A., and D.J. Mladenoff. 2005. Severe wind and fire regimes in northern forests: historical variability at the regional scale. Ecology 86(2):431–445.

Schulte, L.A., and D.J. Mladenoff. 2005. Severe wind and fire regimes in northern forests: historical variability at the regional scale. Ecology 86(2):431–445.

United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2006. Land Resource and Major Land Resource Areas of the United Sates, the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 296.

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. 2015. The ecological landscapes of Wisconsin: An assessment of ecological resources and a guide to planning sustainable management. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, PUB-SS-1131 2015, Madison.

Contributors

Jacob Prater, Associate Professor at University of Wisconsin Stevens Point
Bryant Scharenbroch, Assistant Professor at University of Wisconsin Stevens Point
John Kotar, Ecological Specialist Independent Contractor

Approval

Suzanne Mayne-Kinney, 2/23/2024

Acknowledgments

NRCS contracted UWSP to write ecological sites in MLRA 105. Completed in 2021.

Rangeland health reference sheet

Interpreting Indicators of Rangeland Health is a qualitative assessment protocol used to determine ecosystem condition based on benchmark characteristics described in the Reference Sheet. A suite of 17 (or more) indicators are typically considered in an assessment. The ecological site(s) representative of an assessment location must be known prior to applying the protocol and must be verified based on soils and climate. Current plant community cannot be used to identify the ecological site.

Author(s)/participant(s)
Contact for lead author
Date	05/24/2026
Approved by
Approval date
Composition (Indicators 10 and 12) based on	Annual Production

Indicators

Number and extent of rills:
Presence of water flow patterns:
Number and height of erosional pedestals or terracettes:
Bare ground from Ecological Site Description or other studies (rock, litter, lichen, moss, plant canopy are not bare ground):
Number of gullies and erosion associated with gullies:
Extent of wind scoured, blowouts and/or depositional areas:
Amount of litter movement (describe size and distance expected to travel):
Soil surface (top few mm) resistance to erosion (stability values are averages - most sites will show a range of values):
Soil surface structure and SOM content (include type of structure and A-horizon color and thickness):
Effect of community phase composition (relative proportion of different functional groups) and spatial distribution on infiltration and runoff:
Presence and thickness of compaction layer (usually none; describe soil profile features which may be mistaken for compaction on this site):
Functional/Structural Groups (list in order of descending dominance by above-ground annual-production or live foliar cover using symbols: >>, >, = to indicate much greater than, greater than, and equal to):

Dominant:

Sub-dominant:

Other:

Additional:
Amount of plant mortality and decadence (include which functional groups are expected to show mortality or decadence):
Average percent litter cover (%) and depth ( in):
Expected annual annual-production (this is TOTAL above-ground annual-production, not just forage annual-production):
Potential invasive (including noxious) species (native and non-native). List species which BOTH characterize degraded states and have the potential to become a dominant or co-dominant species on the ecological site if their future establishment and growth is not actively controlled by management interventions. Species that become dominant for only one to several years (e.g., short-term response to drought or wildfire) are not invasive plants. Note that unlike other indicators, we are describing what is NOT expected in the reference state for the ecological site:
Perennial plant reproductive capability:

Download reference sheet

Natural ResourcesConservation Service

Ecological site F105XY012WI

Shallow Loamy-Silty Upland

Last updated: 2/23/2024 Accessed: 05/24/2026

Search

General information

MLRA notes

Classification relationships

Ecological site concept

Associated sites

Similar sites

Table 1. Dominant plant species

Natural Resources
Conservation Service

Last updated: 2/23/2024
Accessed: 05/24/2026