Natural Resources
Conservation Service
Ecological site F108XD907IA
Flaggy Floodplain Forest
Last updated: 10/17/2024
Accessed: 08/20/2026
-
Search
Major Land Resource Area or ecological site by name and/or ID.
PreviousSectionsNextGeneral 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.
Click to explore map
Figure 1. Mapped extent
Areas shown in blue indicate the maximum mapped extent of this ecological site. Other ecological sites likely occur within the highlighted areas. It is also possible for this ecological site to occur outside of highlighted areas if detailed soil survey has not been completed or recently updated.
MLRA notes
Major Land Resource Area (MLRA): 108X–Illinois and Iowa Deep Loess and Drift
The Illinois and Iowa Deep Loess and Drift, Western Part MLRA covers parts of both Iowa and Missouri, and is known locally as part of the Southern Iowa Drift Plain. A silty loess deposit of varied thickness from 5 to 20 feet covers a series of glacial advances known collectively as pre-Illinoisan till. This till, deposited more than half a million years ago, was subjected to multiple instances of extreme erosion, as well as periods of subdued erosion and intense weathering. The loess thickness is deepest in the western part and generally thins eastward. In some areas, the loess has been removed entirely exposing the older weathered till called a “paleosol”. These highly weathered soils are high in clay and slow down the downward movement of water through the profile causing it to move laterally instead of vertically. Wet areas, or “side-hill seeps” commonly form where these paleosols become exposed along hillsides (Prior, 1991).
The dominant soil orders in this MLRA are Mollisols and Alfisols and to a lesser extent Entisols and Inceptisols. Most of the soils are Udolls or Udalfs. Aquolls are on the flatter interfluves. The soils in the area dominantly have a mesic soil temperature regime, an aquic or udic soil moisture regime, and mixed mineralogy. They generally are very deep, well drained to poorly drained, and silty, loamy, or clayey. These soils on uplands include somewhat poorly drained, nearly level Argiudolls (Macksburg series); moderately well drained, gently sloping to strongly sloping Argiudolls (Sharpsburg series); poorly drained, nearly level Argiaquolls (Winterset series); and well drained strongly sloping to steep Hapludalfs (Gara, Lindley, Ladoga, Armstrong, series) (USDA-NRCS Handbook 296).
The western part of the Illinois and Iowa Deep Loess and Drift is a segment of three other MLRAs within the Central Feed Grains and Livestock Region. The other areas are: theClassification relationships
Major Land Resource Area (MLRA): Illinois and Iowa Deep Loess and Drift, Western Part (108D)
USFS Subregions: Central Dissected Till Plains Section (251C); Loess Hills (251Cb) and Central Dissected Till and Loess Plain (251Cc) Subsections (Cleland et al, 2007)
Relationship to Other Established Classifications:
NatureServe Classification: Ecological System: North-Central Interior Floodplain (9338); Ecological Association: Ash - Elm / Wolfberry Forest (NatureServe, 2013)
Landfire Biophysical Setting: Central Tallgrass Prairie (4314210) (Landfire, 2009)Ecological site concept
Flaggy Floodplains are within the red areas on the map (Figure 1). These sites formed alluvial parent material and can be found on floodplains in river valleys. Typically these sites are located down slope from limestone backslope glade ecological sites. Soils are typically either Mollisols or Entisols, characterized by thin variable surfaces containing a wide range of organic matter due to the repeated deposits as a result of flooding. Where these layers have been stable, a thick surface has developed with high organic matter. Plant communities consist of mostly trees, forbs, grasses and few sedges.
Associated sites
R108XD797IA Limestone Backslope Glade
Limestone Backslope Glade. Clayey soils including the Dunbarton series.
Similar sites
F108XD901IA Loamy Floodplain Forest
Loamy Floodplain Forest. Fine-silty and coarse-loamy soils including Nodaway, Landes, Kennebec and Huntsville series.
Table 1. Dominant plant species
Tree (1) Fraxinus pennsylvanica
(2) Ulmus americanaShrub (1) Symphoricarpos occidentalis
Herbaceous Not specified
Physiographic features
Flaggy Floodplains are of small extent, and can be found on floodplains in river valleys along streams and rivers in MLRA 108D. These sites are within a dissected till plain landscape. Slopes are generally less than 2 percent. These sites typically occur in areas surrounded upslope by limestone outcrops.
Figure 2. Location of this ecological site within the MLRA.
Figure 3. Block diagrams representing typical soil-landform sequences in the Loess over Limestone physiographic area. Red asterisks identify soil components correlated to Flaggy Floodplain Forest.
Table 2. Representative physiographic features
Landforms (1) Flood plain
Runoff class Negligible to low Flooding frequency None Ponding frequency None Elevation 499 – 1000 ft Slope 0 – 2 % Water table depth 12 – 60 in Aspect Aspect is not a significant factor Climatic features
The soil temperature regime of MLRA 108D is classified as “mesic” where the mean annual soil temperature is between 46 and 59°F (Soil Survey Staff, 2014). The average freeze-free period of this ecological site is about 166 days, while the frost-free period is about 144 days.
Average annual precipitation is 31 inches, which includes rainfall plus the water equivalent from snowfall. The average annual low and high temperatures are 38 and 60°F, respectively.Table 3 Representative climatic features
Frost-free period (characteristic range) 140-140 days Freeze-free period (characteristic range) 160-170 days Precipitation total (characteristic range) 40-40 in Frost-free period (actual range) 130-150 days Freeze-free period (actual range) 150-180 days Precipitation total (actual range) 40-40 in Frost-free period (average) 140 days Freeze-free period (average) 170 days Precipitation total (average) 40 in Characteristic rangeActual rangeBarLineFigure 4. Monthly precipitation range
Characteristic rangeActual rangeBarLineFigure 5. Monthly minimum temperature range
Characteristic rangeActual rangeBarLineFigure 6. Monthly maximum temperature range
BarLineFigure 7. Monthly average minimum and maximum temperature
Figure 8. Annual precipitation pattern
Figure 9 Annual average temperature pattern
Climate stations used
-
(1) GUTHRIE CTR [USC00133509], Guthrie Center, IA
-
(2) KNOXVILLE [USC00134502], Knoxville, IA
-
(3) GREENFIELD [USC00133438], Greenfield, IA
-
(4) CLARINDA [USC00131533], Clarinda, IA
-
(5) WINTERSET 1N [USC00139132], Winterset, IA
-
(6) MARYVILLE 2E [USC00235340], Maryville, MO
">Influencing water features
Soils are moderately well-drained, and permeability is moderate to rapid. The site contains hydrologic groups A and B/D (Hydrologic Soil Group, 2016). Land capability class is 4s or 5w (Land Capability Classification, 2016). Depth to endosaturation ranges from 1 to 5 feet or more.<br />
<br />
This ecological site is typically in natural levee positions directly adjacent to a perennial stream. Stream levels typically respond quickly to storm events, especially in watersheds where surface runoff is dominant. Short- to medium- duration flooding is common in many areas, particularly during spring and early summer storm events. Constructed levees, often accompanied by stream channelization, have altered the hydrology and flooding dynamics in many places. Streambeds are typically incised into the surrounding floodplain by as much as 10 feet. Some soils in this ecological site have seasonal water tables below about two feet in the winter and spring, generally receding with the falling river levels in the early summer. The water table has a minimal effect on the vegetative community.Soil features
These soils have no major rooting restriction. The soils were formed under forest vegetation, and have either thin, varied organic horizons or dark, organic-rich surface horizons. Parent material is alluvium. These soils contain flagstones within the profile. The soils have loam and loamy sand surface horizons. Subsoils are sand or sandy loam. Soil series associated with this site include Spillville. Also associated are flaggy alluvial lands.
Table 4. Representative soil features
Parent material (1) Alluvium
Surface texture (1) Loamy sand
(2) Loam
Drainage class Moderately well drained Permeability class Very slow to moderate Soil depth 60 in Surface fragment cover <=3" Not specified Surface fragment cover >3" Not specified Available water capacity
(Depth not specified)1.7 – 8.6 in Subsurface fragment volume <=3"
(Depth not specified)0 – 14 % Subsurface fragment volume >3"
(Depth not specified)0 – 45 % Ecological dynamics
Reference plant community is categorized as a lowland mixed deciduous forest and includes trees grasses, forbs, sedges and shrubs. Species composition typically includes Fraxinus pennsylvanica, Ulmus americana, Symphoricarpos occidentalis, Ulmus rubra, Quercus macrocarpa, Juglans nigra, Carya cordiformes, Aesculus glabra, Celtis occidentalis, Sanicula gregaria, Laportea Canadensis, and Asarum canadense (Rosburg, 2015).
Flooding, scouring, and deposition are the major disturbances influencing the dynamics at this site. Changes in channel course causing stream bank erosion, scouring from floodwaters and also deposition as sediment loads are released where floodwaters are moving more slowly, contributes to an extremely variable natural community (Mutel, 2008).State and transition model
Custom diagramStandard diagram
Figure 10. STM
More interactive model formats are also available. View Interactive Models
More interactive model formats are also available. View Interactive Models
Click on state and transition labels to scroll to the respective textEcosystem states
States 2 and 5 (additional transitions)
State 1 submodel, plant communities
State 2 submodel, plant communities
State 3 submodel, plant communities
State 4 submodel, plant communities
State 5 submodel, plant communities
State 1
Reference StateAs a cottonwood/maple floodplain, this state has a reference plant community which is categorized as floodplain forest and includes trees, forbs grasses and sedges. Long term succession and sediment accumulation can cause this state to shift into state 1.2. Catastrophic floods and blow-down can cause a shift back towards the 1.1 reference community. In addition, frequent fires followed by periods of no fire can cause this state to shift to the managed forest state to form.
Dominant plant species
-
green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), tree
-
American elm (Ulmus americana), tree
-
common hackberry (Celtis occidentalis), tree
-
silver maple (Acer saccharinum), tree
-
western snowberry (Symphoricarpos occidentalis), shrub
-
Canadian woodnettle (Laportea canadensis), other herbaceous
Community 1.1
Green ash - American elm / western snowberryHardwood forest dominated by ash and elm.
Dominant plant species
-
green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), tree
-
American elm (Ulmus americana), tree
-
western snowberry (Symphoricarpos occidentalis), shrub
Community 1.2
Common hackberry - silver maple/ Canadian clearweedHardwood floodplain forest with sediment accumulation.
Dominant plant species
-
common hackberry (Celtis occidentalis), tree
-
silver maple (Acer saccharinum), tree
-
Canadian clearweed (Pilea pumila), other herbaceous
Pathway P1.1A
Community 1.1 to 1.2Long term succession and sediment accumulation (10-30 years) can cause this state to shift into state 1.2.
Pathway P1.2A
Community 1.2 to 1.1Catastrophic floods and blow-down can cause a shift back towards the 1.1 reference community.
State 2
MANAGED FOREST STATEWhere this state remains, it has often been subjected to very selective timber harvests. While these forested areas may resemble the reference state, the diversity of tree species has been selectively (removal of oak and walnut) altered. Reducing harvests and extending rotations will cause a transition to community phase 2.2. Eliminating harvests, implementing selective thinning, and allowing long tern succession may allow a return to the reference state where hydrologic regimes are least altered.
Dominant plant species
-
bur oak (Quercus macrocarpa), tree
-
American sycamore (Platanus occidentalis), tree
-
American bladdernut (Staphylea trifolia), shrub
-
wildrye (Elymus), grass
Community 2.1
bur oak - sycamore / American bladdernut / wildryeForest with management inputs.
Dominant plant species
-
bur oak (Quercus macrocarpa), tree
-
American sycamore (Platanus occidentalis), tree
-
American bladdernut (Staphylea trifolia), shrub
-
wildrye (Elymus), grass
Community 2.2
Bur oak - sycamore - black walnut / American bladdernut / wildryeManaged forestland
Dominant plant species
-
bur oak (Quercus macrocarpa), tree
-
American sycamore (Platanus occidentalis), tree
-
black walnut (Juglans nigra), tree
-
American bladdernut (Staphylea trifolia), shrub
-
wildrye (Elymus), grass
Pathway P2.1A
Community 2.1 to 2.2Crop tree release; little to no harvesting (1-20 years).
Pathway P2.2A
Community 2.2 to 2.1Uneven age timber management; harvesting.
State 3
GRASSLAND STATEMany acres of this ecological site have been converted to non-native grasslands of tall fescue and red clover. This state frequently transitions to a cropland state especially when commodity prices are high. A return to a near-reference state from this state is not recommended. Transitioning to a Managed Forest state is possible through long-term commitments of time and money.
Dominant plant species
-
tall fescue (Schedonorus arundinaceus), grass
-
red clover (Trifolium pratense), other herbaceous
Community 3.1
Tall fescue / Red clovermanaged pasture.
Dominant plant species
-
tall fescue (Schedonorus arundinaceus), grass
-
red clover (Trifolium pratense), other herbaceous
State 4
HIGH GRADED / GRAZED FOREST STATEThis state is subjected to uncontrolled grazing and high-graded timber harvests. The grazing will open up the understory and remove much of the diverse ground flora. This can lead to erosion of the topsoil during floods. Grazed units also often undergo timber harvest removing a wide variety of outstanding hardwood trees, further diminishing the structural and compositional diversity
Dominant plant species
-
American sycamore (Platanus occidentalis), tree
-
green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), tree
-
buckbrush (Ceanothus cuneatus), shrub
-
wildrye (Elymus), grass
Community 4.1
Sycamore - Green ash / buckbrush / greenbrier - wildryea high graded or grazed forest community
Dominant plant species
-
American sycamore (Platanus occidentalis), tree
-
green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), tree
-
buckbrush (Ceanothus cuneatus), shrub
-
wildrye (Elymus), grass
State 5
CROPLAND STATESome areas of this ecological site have been converted to row crop agriculture. They often transition to a grassland state. A return to the near-reference state is not practical from this state. Transitioning to a Managed Forest state may be possible through long-term commitments of time and money.
Although corn and soybeans are common, many different crops may be grown.Community 5.1
Corn, soybeansRow crop agriculture. Many species may be planted depending on landowner objectives.
Transition T1A
State 1 to 2Uneven- age timber management; harvesting.
Transition T1B
State 1 to 3Clearing; pasture planting; prescribed grazing.
Transition T1C
State 1 to 4Poorly planned harvest; uncontrolled grazing.
Restoration pathway R2A
State 2 to 1Forest stand improvement; long term succession (10-20 plus years)
Transition T3A
State 3 to 2Tree planting; long term succession; forest stand improvement; access control.
Transition T3B
State 3 to 5Tillage; conservation cropping system
Transition T4C
State 4 to 2Forest stand improvement; access control.
Restoration pathway T4A
State 4 to 3Clearing; pasture planting; prescribed grazing
Transition T4B
State 4 to 5Clearing; tillage; conservation cropping system.
Transition T5B
State 5 to 2Tree planting long term succession; forest stand improvement; access control
Restoration pathway T5A
State 5 to 3Pasture planting; prescribed grazing
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 3.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 10. Community 4.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 11. Community 5.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Interpretations
Supporting information
Inventory data references
No field plots were available for this site. A review of the scientific literature and professional experience were used to approximate the plant communities for this provisional ecological site. Information for the state-and-transition model was obtained from the same sources. All community phases are considered provisional based on these plots and the sources identified in ecological site description.
Other references
Cleland, D.T., J.A. Freeouf, J.E. Keys, G.J. Nowacki, C. Carpenter, and W.H. McNab. 2007. Ecological Subregions: Sections and Subsections of the Conterminous United States. USDA Forest Service, General Technical Report WO-76. Washington, DC.
Landfire. 2009. Biophysical Setting 4314210 Central Tallgrass Prairie. In: Landfire National Vegetation Dynamics Models. USDA For. Serv. and U.S. Department of Interior. Washington, DC.
Mutel, Cornelia F. 2008. The Emerald Horizon: The History of Nature in Iowa. University of Iowa Press.
NatureServe. 2013. Associations and alliances of Iowa. St. Paul, Minnesota.
Prior, Jean Cutler. 1991. Landforms of Iowa. University of Iowa Press, Iowa City, Iowa.
Rosburg, T. 2015 July 29. Middle River Park. Unpublished raw data. Ecological Site Contract.
Soil Survey Staff. 2014. Keys to soil taxonomy, 12th ed. USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service.
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States, the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. USDA Handbook 296.
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. Hydrologic Soil Group. National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/ref/?cid=nrcs142p2_054223#39 accessed August 29, 2016.
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. Land Capability Classification. National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/ref/?cid=nrcs142p2_054226#02 accessed August 29, 2016.
Woodland Health: Stewardship Options for Iowa Woodland Owners. 2004. Iowa Natural Heritage Foundation. Des Moines, Iowa.Contributors
John Hammerly (john.hammerly@usda.gov)
Dan Pulido (dan.pulido@usda.gov)Approval
Suzanne Mayne-Kinney, 10/17/2024
Acknowledgments
This ESD was originally approved prior to April 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 08/20/2026 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:
Print Options
Sections
Font
AAAAOther
PrintThe Ecosystem Dynamics Interpretive Tool is an information system framework developed by the USDA-ARS Jornada Experimental Range, USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service, and New Mexico State University.
Accessibility statement