Natural Resources
Conservation Service

Ecological site F111XB302IN

Mesic Bedrock Forest

Last updated: 9/11/2024
Accessed: 08/18/2026

Home / esd CATALOG / MLRA 111X / ecological site F111XB302IN

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): 111X–Indiana and Ohio Till Plain

111B – Indiana and Ohio Till Plain, Northeastern Part. This area is in the Eastern Lake and Till Plains Sections of the Central Lowland Province of the Interior Plains. The entire MLRA is glaciated, and most areas are dominated by ground moraines that are broken in places by lake plains, outwash plains, flood plains, and many recessional moraines. The ground moraines and lake plains in front of the recessional moraines are flat to undulating. In many places stream valleys occur at the leading edge of the recessional moraines. Narrow, shallow valleys commonly are along the major rivers and streams in this MLRA, and some areas along the major rivers and streams have deposits of sand. Elevation ranges from 630 to 1,550 feet (190 to 470 meters), increasing gradually from west to east. Relief is mainly a few meters, but in some areas hills rise as much as 100 feet (30 meters) above the adjoining plains.

The extent of the major Hydrologic Unit Areas (identified by four-digit numbers) that make up this MLRA is as follows: Western Lake Erie (0410), 41 percent; Wabash (0512), 28 percent; Scioto (0, 28 percent; Scioto (0506), 10 percent; St. Clair-Detroit (0409), 9 percent; Great Miami (0508), 6 percent; Southeastern Lake Michigan (0405), 5 percent; and Southwestern Lake Huron (0408), 1 percent. The Huron River in Michigan, Cedar Creek in Indiana, and the Sandusky River in Ohio have been designated as National Wild and Scenic Rivers in this MLRA.

The surficial materials in this area include glacial deposits of till, outwash, and lacustrine sediments from Wisconsin and older glacial periods. A thin mantle of loess occurs in some areas. Most of the MLRA is underlain by Silurian and Devonian limestone and dolostone. Middle Devonian to Early Mississippian black shale and Early to Middle Mississippian siltstone and shale are in some areas of the northern part of the MLRA.

Classification relationships

Major Land Resource Area (USDA-Natural Resources Conservation Service, 2006)

USFS Ecological Regions (USDA, 2007):
Sections –Central Till Plains, Beech Maple (222H), South Central Great Lakes (222J)

Subsections – Bluffton Till Plains (222Ha), Bluffton-Ann Arbor Till Plains (222Je), Jackson Interlobate Moraine (222Jg), Steuben Interlobate Moraines (222Ji)

NatureServe Systems anticipated (NatureServe, 2011): Agriculture - Cultivated Crops and Irrigated Agriculture, Agriculture – Pasture/Hay, North-Central Interior Dry-Mesic Oak Forest and Woodland, Northeastern Interior Dry-Mesic Oak Forest, Ruderal Forest

LANDFIRE Biophysical Settings anticipated (USGS, 2010): Northeastern Interior Dry-Mesic Oak Forest, North-Central Interior Dry-Mesic Oak Forest and Woodland

Ecological site concept

This site is an upland site generally formed on residuum weathered from sandstone overlain with till or loess. The depth to the restrictive layer is between 20 to 40 inches. Drainage is somewhat poorly drained with slopes generally from 0-3%. The characteristic vegetation of this site is that of a forest comprised largely of fire sensitive, shade tolerant species. The dominant canopy level species include sugar maple, American beech, and tulip tree. Gap phase regeneration is the most common disturbance dynamic on the site and allows these species to reach the canopy. Wind throw and ice storms are larger scale disturbance mechanisms, but they incur very infrequently. The site can be susceptible to the establishment and dominance of the understory by woody, invasive, non-native species. Most of this historically woodland site is now being for agriculture to include hay, pasture, and row crops.

Associated sites

R111XB301IN	Dark Bedrock Prairie Soil surfaces are dark in color
F111XB303IN	Dry Bedrock Forest Soils are moderately well drained or drier

R111XB301IN

Dark Bedrock Prairie

Soil surfaces are dark in color

F111XB303IN

Dry Bedrock Forest

Soils are moderately well drained or drier

Similar sites

F111XB102IN	Lacustrine Forest Lacustrine Forest
F111XB403IN	Outwash Upland Outwash Upland
F111XB502IN	Wet Till Ridge Wet Till Ridge
F111XE503IN	Till Ridge Till Ridge

Table 1. Dominant plant species

Tree	(1) Acer saccharum (2) Fagus grandifolia
Shrub	Not specified
Herbaceous	Not specified

Download full description

Physiographic features

This ecological site is found in karst landscapes in MLRA 111B: Indiana and Ohio Till Plain, Northeastern Part. Soils are moderately deep (20-40 inches) from lithic contact.

Landforms that contain this site include ground moraines, monadock, ris and till plains. Slopes for this site can be low and range from 0 to 3 percent.

Figure 1. Block diagram with Randolph representing the site on the landscape.

Table 2. Representative physiographic features

Landforms	(1) Till plain (2) Monadnock (3) Moraine
Runoff class	Low to high
Flooding frequency	None
Ponding frequency	None
Elevation	635 – 1150 ft
Slope	0 – 3 %
Water table depth	9 – 21 in
Aspect	Aspect is not a significant factor

Climatic features

The average annual precipitation in this area is 30 to 39 inches (760 to 990 millimeters). Most of the rainfall occurs as convective thunderstorms during the growing season. About half or more of the annual precipitation occurs during the freeze-free period. Snowfall is common in winter. The average annual temperature is 47 to 52 degrees F (8 to 11 degrees C). The freeze-free period averages about 180 days and ranges from 165 to 195 days.

Table 3 Representative climatic features

Frost-free period (characteristic range)	130-150 days
Freeze-free period (characteristic range)	170-180 days
Precipitation total (characteristic range)	40-40 in
Frost-free period (actual range)	120-150 days
Freeze-free period (actual range)	160-180 days
Precipitation total (actual range)	30-40 in
Frost-free period (average)	140 days
Freeze-free period (average)	170 days
Precipitation total (average)	40 in

Characteristic range

Actual range

Bar

Line

Figure 2. Monthly precipitation range

Characteristic range

Actual range

Bar

Line

Figure 3. Monthly minimum temperature range

Characteristic range

Actual range

Bar

Line

Figure 4. Monthly maximum temperature range

Bar

Line

Figure 5. Monthly average minimum and maximum temperature

Figure 6. Annual precipitation pattern

Figure 7 Annual average temperature pattern

Climate stations used

(1) HUNTINGTON [USC00124181], Huntington, IN
(2) WABASH [USC00129138], Wabash, IN
(3) MARION 2 N [USC00334942], Marion, OH
(4) CELINA 3 NE [USC00331390], Celina, OH
(5) HARTFORD CITY 4 ESE [USC00123777], Hartford City, IN
(6) PONTIAC WWTP [USC00206658], Auburn Hills, MI
(7) ANN ARBOR SE [USC00200228], Ann Arbor, MI
(8) HILLSDALE [USC00203823], Hillsdale, MI

Soil features

The soil series associated with this site are: Randolph. They are moderately deep, somewhat poorly drained, and moderately slow to moderate permeable soils, with slightly acidic to neutral soil reaction that formed in Residuum.

Parent Materials Kind: residuum
Surface Texture: loam, silt loam
Subsurface Texture group: loamy

Figure 8. Location of mapunits within the MLRA.

Table 4. Representative soil features

Parent material	(1) Residuum
Surface texture	(1) Loam (2) Silt loam
Drainage class	Somewhat poorly drained
Permeability class	Moderately slow to moderate
Soil depth	25 – 36 in
Surface fragment cover <=3"	0 – 2 %
Surface fragment cover >3"	Not specified
Available water capacity (Depth not specified)	3.9 – 6 in
Calcium carbonate equivalent (Depth not specified)	0 – 20 %
Electrical conductivity (Depth not specified)	Not specified
Sodium adsorption ratio (Depth not specified)	Not specified
Soil reaction (1:1 water) (Depth not specified)	6.2 – 7.9
Subsurface fragment volume >3" (Depth not specified)	1 – 21 %

Ecological dynamics

The historic plant community of the Deep Restricted ecological site is a forest with the dominant species in the canopy being sugar maple, beech, and tulip-tree. Canopy associates include white oak, shagbark hickory, hackberry and black walnut. This site is dominated by fire sensitive and shade tolerant species. Species with these characteristics make it to the canopy via gap-phase recruitment on a local scale. Since settlement, parts of this site have been converted to agricultural use with the majority being to grow hay or used as pasture. The areas still in natural vegetation are at risk of having their understory invaded and dominated by invasive species such as Asian honeysuckles and even Callery pear.

State and transition model

Custom diagram

Standard diagram

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 text

State 1
Mesic Forest

This is the diagnostic plant community for this site. In reference condition, this site was dominated by sugar maple, beech, and tulip-tree. An earlier successional phase of this site is comprised largely of shrubs and pioneering species. Stand replacing events were very uncommon. Small gap disturbance was the most common disturbance event that allowed propagation of these species.

Dominant plant species

sugar maple (Acer saccharum), tree
American beech (Fagus grandifolia), tree
tuliptree (Liriodendron tulipifera), tree

Community 1.1
shrubs -pioneer trees

This phase in characterized by pioneering woody species that respond rapidly to increased light availability. Cover is generally very heavy, but not usually very tall. As time and succession progress, the trees become larger and less dense.

Dominant plant species

sugar maple (Acer saccharum), tree
tuliptree (Liriodendron tulipifera), tree

Community 1.2
sugar maple - beech

This phase in characterized by tree dominance, particularly sugar maple, tulip-tree, and beech. Additional canopy species include white oak, shagbark hickory, hackberry and black walnut.

Dominant plant species

sugar maple (Acer saccharum), tree
tuliptree (Liriodendron tulipifera), tree
American beech (Fagus grandifolia), tree

Pathway P1.1A
Community 1.1 to 1.2

Time and succession will move the site from this phase to the full expression of Community Phase 1.2

Pathway P1.2A
Community 1.2 to 1.1

Disturbance, whether natural or as management, that removes a large portion of the trees will move the site towards phase 1.1

State 2
Invaded State

This state is characterized by the establishment and eventual dominance of invasive species in the understory. This greatly reduces the species richness and diversity of the site as a whole. Common invasive species for this site include, but are not limited to, species of Asian bush honeysuckle, Callery pear, autumn olive and ailanthus.

Dominant plant species

sugar maple (Acer saccharum), tree
American beech (Fagus grandifolia), tree
tuliptree (Liriodendron tulipifera), tree
honeysuckle (Lonicera), shrub
autumn olive (Elaeagnus umbellata), shrub
tree of heaven (Ailanthus altissima), shrub
Callery pear (Pyrus calleryana), shrub

Community 2.1
sugar maple - beech / invasive understory

This phase is characterized by the understory being dominated by woody, mostly non-native, invasive species.

Dominant plant species

sugar maple (Acer saccharum), tree
American beech (Fagus grandifolia), tree
tuliptree (Liriodendron tulipifera), tree
autumn olive (Elaeagnus umbellata), shrub
Callery pear (Pyrus calleryana), shrub
honeysuckle (Lonicera), shrub
tree of heaven (Ailanthus altissima), shrub

State 3
Agricultural State

This state is characterized by the conversion of the site to agricultural use. Most typical practice is to grow forage and pasture, but corn and soybean rotations of various types are common as well.

Community 3.1
Corn - soybeans cropland

This phase is characterized by row crop agriculture of small grains, primarily corn and soybeans.

Community 3.2
cool season grasses pasture/ forage

This phase is characterized by forage or grazing agriculture. Different mixes of, generally, cool season grasses and forbs, largely clovers, are grown.

Pathway P3.1A
Community 3.1 to 3.2

Planting of cool season pasture/forage species and management to maintain them.

Pathway P3.2A
Community 3.2 to 3.1

Planting, either by conventional or no-till methods, of row crop. Management that keeps the site in row crop production

Transition T1A
State 1 to 2

Establishment of invasive species with not management to control them will move the site towards the Invaded State.

Transition T1B
State 1 to 3

The site is converted to the Agriculture State (#3) after the woody species are removed, the crops planted, and implementation of agricultural practices.

Restoration pathway R2A
State 2 to 1

Chemical and mechanical treatment of the invasive species. Planting of desired species may be needed if they are not enough left to recolonize the site.

Transition T2A
State 2 to 3

Removal of trees and other woody species. Install drainage system (if warranted), prepare the site for planting the agricultural crop, and regular agricultural practices.

Restoration pathway R3A
State 3 to 1

Removal of drainage system (if warranted), site preparation, and tree planting.

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 3.1 plant community composition

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

Table 9. Community 3.2 plant community composition

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

Supporting information

Inventory data references

Site concept developed through expert opinion, review of the literature, and field work.

Other references

Braun, E. Lucy. 2001. Deciduous forests of eastern North America. Caldwell, N.J.: Blackburn Press.

Federal Geographic Data Committee. 2013. Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States. FGDC-STD-004-2013. Second Edition. Wetlands Subcommittee, Federal Geographic Data Committee and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC.

Homoya, M. A., Abrell, D. B., Aldrich, J. R., & Post, T. W. (1985). The Natural Regions of Indiana. Indiana Academy of Science , 94, 245-269.

NatureServe. (2011). An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. NatureServe, Arlington, VA, USA [Online: www. natureserve. org/explorer] .

Jackson, Marion T. 1997. The Natural heritage of Indiana. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, published in association with the Indiana Department of Natural Resources and the Indiana Academy of Science.

Johnson, Paul S., Stephen R. Shifley, and Robert Rogers. 2002. The ecology and silviculture of oaks. Wallingford, Oxon: CABI

Upland Oak Ecology Symposium, and Martin A. Spetich. 2004. Upland Oak Ecology Symposium: history, current conditions, and sustainability : Fayetteville, Arkansas, October 7-10, 2002. [Asheville, NC]: [Southern Research Station].

USDA. (2007). Ecological Subregions: Sections and Subsections for the Conterminous United States. Washington, DC: USDA - Forest Service.

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

USDA-NRCS. 2008. Hydrogeomorphic Wetland Classification System: An Overview and Modification to Better Meet the Needs of the Natural Resources Conservation Service. Technical Note No. 190–8–76. Washington D.C.

USGS. (2010). LANDFIRE Biophysical Settings. Retrieved from http://www.landfire.gov

Whitaker, John O., Charles J. Amlaner, Marion T. Jackson, George R. Parker, and Peter Evans Scott. 2012. Habitats and ecological communities of Indiana presettlement to present. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

Approval

Greg Schmidt, 9/11/2024

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)	Tyler Staggs
Contact for lead author
Date	08/18/2026
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 F111XB302IN

Mesic Bedrock Forest

Last updated: 9/11/2024 Accessed: 08/18/2026

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: 9/11/2024
Accessed: 08/18/2026