Natural Resources
Conservation Service
Ecological site F114XA102IN
Lacustrine Terrace Forest
Last updated: 9/26/2024
Accessed: 09/14/2026
-
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.
MLRA notes
Major Land Resource Area (MLRA): 114X–Southern Illinois and Indiana Thin Loess and Till Plain
Overview of the MLRAMLRA 114 makes up about 4,550 square miles (11,795 square kilometers. The three parts of this MRLA are mostly in the Till Plains Section of the Central Lowland Province of the Interior Plains. The western third of the western part is in the Highland Rim Section of the Interior Low Plateaus Province of the Interior Plains. The eastern half of the eastern part is in the Kanawha Section of the Appalachian Plateaus Province of the Appalachian Highlands.
Both large and small tributaries of the Ohio River dissect the nearly level to very steep glaciated uplands in this area. The major streams and rivers have well defined valleys with broad flood plains and numerous stream terraces. The flood plains along the smaller streams are narrow. Broad summits are nearly level to gently sloping. Elevation ranges from 320 feet (100 meters) on the southernmost flood plain along the Ohio River to 1,250 feet (380 meters) on the highest ridges. Local relief is mainly 10 to 50 feet (3 to 15 meters), but it can be 50 to 100 feet (15 to 30 meters) along drainageways and streams. Also, the Ohio River bluffs are as much as 300 feet (90 meters) above the river valley floor.Classification relationships
US Forest Service EcoRegion: 222 Eastern Broadleaf Forest (Continental) Province
Homoya's Natural Regions of Indiana: Bluegrass Region
The following NatureServe Explorer Ecological System has a high level of probability to match the ecological site found on these soils. Field verification and ESD development is needed prior to using this information for conservation planning and/or restoration initiatives: South-Central Interior Mesophytic Forest CES 202.887.Ecological site concept
The Sloping Lacustrine Forest site is found on sloping lacustrine soils and are a mesic hardwood forest with a substantial oak component. Species include sugar maple, northern red oak, American beech, sugar maple, white oak, tulip tree, white ash, and basswood. Understory vegetation density and composition will depend on canopy cover, micro-topography, and disturbance regime and may vary from site to site. The high-quality sites will exhibit a diverse array of native herbaceous species including numerous spring wildflowers. Understory herbaceous and shrub species present in examples of this system can vary. Stands dense tree cover have less shrub and herbaceous species while stand with more open tree canopy cover will tend to have a dense understory. The most abundant component of the shrub layer is often samplings of canopy trees.
Associated sites
F114XA101IN Wet Lacustrine Forest
Wet Lacustrine Forest. These sites are very poorly drained to somewhat poorly drained.
Similar sites
F114XA501IN Wet Till Flatwoods
Wet Till Forest. These sites are on till plains and share many similar species.
Table 1. Dominant plant species
Tree (1) Quercus rubra
(2) Acer saccharumShrub (1) Viburnum acerifolium
(2) Lindera benzoinHerbaceous (1) Asarum canadense
(2) Galium circaezansPhysiographic features
These sites are found on stream terraces and lake plains. Slopes generally range from 8-20%.
Figure 1. Physiographic Image – Block diagram with Dubois, Haubstadt and Otwell representing a site on the landscape.
Table 2. Representative physiographic features
Landforms (1) Valley > Terrace
(2) Lake plain
Runoff class Low to very high Flooding frequency None Ponding frequency None Elevation 340 – 1020 ft Slope 0 – 20 % Water table depth 6 – 70 in Aspect Aspect is not a significant factor Climatic features
About 60 percent of the precipitation falls during the freeze-free period. Most of the rainfall occurs as high-intensity, convective thunderstorms during summer. Snowfall is common in winter. The freeze-free period averages about 180 days.
Table 3 Representative climatic features
Frost-free period (characteristic range) 150-160 days Freeze-free period (characteristic range) 180-180 days Precipitation total (characteristic range) 50-50 in Frost-free period (actual range) 150-160 days Freeze-free period (actual range) 180-180 days Precipitation total (actual range) 50-50 in Frost-free period (average) 160 days Freeze-free period (average) 180 days Precipitation total (average) 50 in Characteristic rangeActual rangeBarLineFigure 2. Monthly precipitation range
Characteristic rangeActual rangeBarLineFigure 3. Monthly minimum temperature range
Characteristic rangeActual rangeBarLineFigure 4. Monthly maximum temperature range
BarLineFigure 5. Monthly average minimum and maximum temperature
Figure 6. Annual precipitation pattern
Figure 7 Annual average temperature pattern
Climate stations used
-
(1) NORTH VERNON 2 ESE [USC00126435], North Vernon, IN
-
(2) SEYMOUR 2 N [USC00127935], Seymour, IN
-
(3) MILFORD [USC00335268], Milford, OH
">Influencing water features
This ecological site is not influenced by wetland or riparian water features. Some sites may have a seasonally high water table.
Soil features
Soils are somewhat poorly drained to moderately well drained, and very slow to moderate permeable soils, with acidic to neutral soil reaction, that formed in glaciolacustrine deposits and lacustrine deposits. Soils are very deep but may have a restrictive layer between 20-40". Soil series currently in this group include Bartle, Dubois, Haubstadt, Otwell, and Pekin.
Table 4. Representative soil features
Parent material (1) Loess
(2) Lacustrine deposits
(3) Outwash
(4) Alluvium
Surface texture (1) Silt loam
Drainage class Somewhat poorly drained to moderately well drained Permeability class Very slow to moderate Depth to restrictive layer 22 – 40 in Soil depth 80 in Surface fragment cover <=3" Not specified Surface fragment cover >3" Not specified Available water capacity
(Depth not specified)4.5 – 7.7 in Soil reaction (1:1 water)
(Depth not specified)4.4 – 5.9 Subsurface fragment volume <=3"
(Depth not specified)0 – 7 % Subsurface fragment volume >3"
(Depth not specified)Not specified Ecological dynamics
The historic plant community of the Lacustrine Forest ecological site is a mesic hardwood forest with a strong oak component. On high quality sites, the major canopy species include northern red oak (Quercus rubra), white oak (Q. alba), sugar maple (Acer saccharum), American beech (Fagus grandifolia), basswood (Tilia americana) and tulip-tree (Liriodendron tulipifera). Other species on site may include black walnut (Juglans nigra), shagbark hickory (Carya ovata), bitternut hickory (Carya cordiformis), American elm (Ulmus americana), and white ash (Fraxinus americana). Numerous native understory species are found on these sites.
According to USDA-USFS LANDFIRE data, full stand replacement fires on these sites were rare (State and transition model
Custom diagramStandard 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 textEcosystem states
T1A - Invasive plant establishment and increase. T1B - Clearing; brush removal; site preparation; tillage; seeding; weed control R2A - Brush removal; weed control; tree planting; timber stand improvement practices T2A - Tree/brush removal; weed control; site preparation; tillage and seeding; continuous management inputs. T3A - No management inputs; abandonment. State 1 submodel, plant communities
State 2 submodel, plant communities
State 3 submodel, plant communities
3.1.A - Seeding; weed control; grassland management 3.2.A - Site preparation; tillage; seeding; cropland management State 1
Reference State -ForestlandThis is the diagnostic plant community for this site is a high quality mixed hardwood forest. Dominant species include northern red oak, white oak, sugar maple, American beech, basswood, white ash, and black walnut. Various shrub species may be present along with a highly diverse understory including numerous spring ephemerals. Numerous native understory plants may be found on these sites.
Dominant plant species
-
northern red oak (Quercus rubra), tree
-
white oak (Quercus alba), tree
-
sugar maple (Acer saccharum), tree
-
hybrid hickory (Carya), tree
-
American beech (Fagus grandifolia), tree
-
northern spicebush (Lindera benzoin), shrub
-
mapleleaf viburnum (Viburnum acerifolium), shrub
-
Canadian wildginger (Asarum canadense), other herbaceous
-
bedstraw (Galium), other herbaceous
-
sanicle (Sanicula), other herbaceous
-
alumroot (Heuchera), other herbaceous
-
ticktrefoil (Desmodium), other herbaceous
Community 1.1
Mixed Hardwood ForestThis phase in characterized by a high quality, diverse, mature mixed hardwood forest with oaks, hickory, sugar maple, ashes, and American beech as key component. Additional canopy species include basswood, tulip-tree, black walnut, and elms.
Dominant plant species
-
northern red oak (Quercus rubra), tree
-
sugar maple (Acer saccharum), tree
-
white oak (Quercus alba), tree
-
hybrid hickory (Carya), tree
-
American beech (Fagus grandifolia), tree
-
northern spicebush (Lindera benzoin), shrub
-
mapleleaf viburnum (Viburnum acerifolium), shrub
-
Canadian wildginger (Asarum canadense), other herbaceous
-
bedstraw (Galium), other herbaceous
-
ticktrefoil (Desmodium), other herbaceous
-
alumroot (Heuchera), other herbaceous
-
sanicle (Sanicula), other herbaceous
State 2
Disturbed -Invaded Forest StateMany of these sites have been invaded by non-native vegetation due to anthropogenic disturbances including timber harvest, road construction, recreation activities (ORV), and unmanaged grazing. Numerous species may be present depending on the disturbance type and severity and available seed exposure.
Dominant plant species
-
maple (Acer), tree
-
ash (Fraxinus), tree
-
Amur honeysuckle (Lonicera maackii), shrub
-
autumn olive (Elaeagnus umbellata), shrub
-
Nepalese browntop (Microstegium vimineum), grass
-
garlic mustard (Alliaria petiolata), other herbaceous
-
Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), other herbaceous
Community 2.1
Disturbed -Invaded CommunityThis community is characterized by the establishment and eventual dominance of invasive species in the midstory and/or understory. Common invasives include, but are not limited to, Asian bush honeysuckle (Lonicera maackii), Callery pear (Pyrus calleryana Decne.), garlic mustard (Alliaria petiolate), Japanese stiltgrass (Microstegium vimineum), tree-of-heaven (Ailanthus), Japonese honeysuckle ( Lonicera japonica ) and wintercreeper (Euonymus fortune).
Dominant plant species
-
Amur honeysuckle (Lonicera maackii), shrub
-
autumn olive (Elaeagnus umbellata), shrub
-
garlic mustard (Alliaria petiolata), other herbaceous
-
Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), other herbaceous
State 3
Agricultural StateThis state is characterized by the conversion of the site to agricultural use. The most common land use is a corn-soybean rotation. A portion of the historic acres are used for hay production and pasture. Most pastureland is seeded with cool -season grasses such as tall fescue with forbs such as red clover.
Dominant plant species
-
tall fescue (Schedonorus arundinaceus), grass
-
red clover (Trifolium pratense), other herbaceous
-
corn (Zea), other herbaceous
-
soybean (Glycine), other herbaceous
Community 3.1
Row cropsThis phase is characterized by row crop agriculture of small grains. The primarily agricultural commodities are corn and soybeans; however, numerous species can be grown depending on the landowner's objectives.
Community 3.2
PasturelandThese sites are generally seeded in cool season grasses with a mix of forbs and utilized for hay production or grazing.
Dominant plant species
-
tall fescue (Schedonorus arundinaceus), grass
-
brome (Bromus), grass
-
Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis), grass
-
red clover (Trifolium pratense), other herbaceous
-
white clover (Trifolium repens), other herbaceous
Pathway 3.1.A
Community 3.1 to 3.2Establishment of pastureland for forage production. Mechanism and practices will depend on management objectives and what grasses and forbs are desired. Warm or cool season grasses may be utilized and numerous forbs may be included in the seeding mix.
Pathway 3.2.A
Community 3.2 to 3.1Planting, either by conventional or no-till methods, of row crop. Continual management required. Many different species can be grown on these sites but a corn-soybean rotation is the most common.
Transition T1A
State 1 to 2Establishment of invasive understory species with no management to control their abundance or distribution.
Transition T1B
State 1 to 3Conversion of site to agricultural uses includes clearing of trees and other wood species, site preparation, tillage, seeding, and continued maintenance. Practices depend on management objectives and crop type.
Restoration pathway R2A
State 2 to 1Numerous long-term management activities will be required to restore these sites to the reference community. Chemical and mechanical treatment of the invasive species will be critical, along with the planting of desired tree species. Planting will depend on available seed sources. Timber stand improvement activities will be needed such as brush control, weed control, and selective thinning.
Transition T2A
State 2 to 3Activities include clearing of trees/brush, weed treatment, site preparation, seeding and continuous management. Practices will depend on crops seeded and management objectives.
Transition T3A
State 3 to 2Agricultural sites no longer managed will move toward successional stages including annual weeds and grasses to perennial grasses, forbs, shrubs and trees. Tree species will eventually become dominant; however, the species composition will be dependent upon seed availability. Site usually are pioneered by fast-growing species such as maple, ash, cottonwood, tulip poplar, eastern red cedar and locust.
Additional community tables
Table 5. Community 1.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 6. Community 2.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 7. Community 3.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 8. Community 3.2 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Interpretations
Supporting information
Inventory data references
No field monitoring was conducted as part of this PES development. Future ESD development may result in plant community edits, soil mapunits being added or removed from this grouping, and/or additions or modifications to the narratives, tables, vegetation descriptions and state and transition model.
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.
Kartesz, J. T. (2011). Density Gradient Map Samples Produced From BONAP's Floristic Synthesis. Retrieved 12 12, 2011, from Biota of North America Program: http://bonap.org/diversity/diversity/diversity.html
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.
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, 9/26/2024
Acknowledgments
PES documents developed for adjacent MLRAs in Indiana and Ohio served as a source of information as these MLRAs often shared similar soil series with MLRA 114A. NRCS county soil surveys where a valuable reference including tree species observed on site by NRCS staff. Soil Survey and NRCS Indiana resource soil scientists contributed field observation, field notes, and extensive soil mapping expertise. In accordance with Federal Civil Rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Civil Rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior credible activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English. To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at How to File a Program Discrimination Complaint and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in the form. To request a copy of the complaint form, call (866) 632-9992. Submit your completed form or letter to USDA by: (1) mail: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C. 20250-9410; (2) fax: (202) 690-7442; or (3) email: program.intake@usda.gov. USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender.
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) A. Arends, ESI Specialist Contact for lead author Date 09/14/2026 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
