Natural Resources
Conservation Service
Ecological site F114XA302IN
Acidic Upland 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
MLRA 114A 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
USFS: 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. Southern Interior Low Plateau Dry-Mesic Oak Forest-Unique Identifier: CES202.898Ecological site concept
Acidic Upland Forest sites were historically a mature hardwood forest community with oaks and hickories being the dominant canopy species. These upland sites are found on acidic soils. Decades of disturbance (logging, grazing, invasive vegetation, fire suppression, etc.) have impacted most sites that are still wooded. These disturbances have transitioned most sites to a mixed hardwood forest with less of an oak component that was historically present and an increase in maple, ash and tulip poplar. The majority of areas have now been converted for agricultural use.
Associated sites
F114XA502IN Till Uplands
Till Upland Forest. These sites are on upland till plains.
Similar sites
F114XA305IN Non-Acidic Upland Forest
The non-acidic upland forest sites also are dominated by a oak-hickory forest; however the species on these sites are those adapted to calcareous soils.
Table 1. Dominant plant species
Tree (1) Quercus velutina
(2) Carya glabraShrub (1) Vaccinium
Herbaceous (1) Agrimonia
(2) DesmodiumPhysiographic features
These sites are generally located on hillsides, ridges, and till plains.
Table 2. Representative physiographic features
Landforms (1) Upland > Hill
(2) Upland > Ridge
(3) Till plain > Till plain
Runoff class Low to high Flooding frequency None Ponding frequency None Elevation 340 – 1200 ft Slope 6 – 18 % Water table depth 6 – 60 in Aspect W, NW, N, NE, E, SE, S, SW Table 3. Representative physiographic features (actual ranges)
Runoff class Not specified Flooding frequency Not specified Ponding frequency Not specified Elevation 0 ft Slope 0 – 25 % Water table depth 0 in 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 4 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 1. Monthly precipitation range
Characteristic rangeActual rangeBarLineFigure 2. Monthly minimum temperature range
Characteristic rangeActual rangeBarLineFigure 3. Monthly maximum temperature range
BarLineFigure 4. Monthly average minimum and maximum temperature
Figure 5. Annual precipitation pattern
Figure 6 Annual average temperature pattern
Climate stations used
-
(1) SEYMOUR 2 N [USC00127935], Seymour, IN
-
(2) LEXINGTON 3N [USC00124977], Lexington, IN
-
(3) MILFORD [USC00335268], Milford, OH
-
(4) NORTH VERNON 2 ESE [USC00126435], North Vernon, IN
">Influencing water features
There are no riparian or wetland features influencing these sites.
Soil features
Soils associated with this site are acidic, often on black or gray shale. Series include Deputy, Gilpin, Jennings, Jessietown, Loudon, Loudonville, Mechanicburg, Rarden Scottsburg Trappist, Weddel, and Whitcomb.
Table 5. Representative soil features
Parent material (1) Residuum – shale
(2) Till
(3) Loess
(4) Slope alluvium
Surface texture (1) Silt loam
(2) Silty clay
(3) Silty clay loam
Drainage class Somewhat poorly drained to well drained Permeability class Slow to moderately rapid Depth to restrictive layer 24 – 70 in Soil depth 17 – 60 in Surface fragment cover <=3" 0 – 2 % Surface fragment cover >3" 0 – 2 % Available water capacity
(Depth not specified)4 – 6 in Soil reaction (1:1 water)
(Depth not specified)4.5 – 6 Subsurface fragment volume <=3"
(Depth not specified)0 – 5 % Subsurface fragment volume >3"
(Depth not specified)0 – 5 % Table 6. Representative soil features (actual values)
Drainage class Not specified Permeability class Not specified Depth to restrictive layer 0 in Soil depth 0 in Surface fragment cover <=3" 0 % Surface fragment cover >3" 0 % Available water capacity
(Depth not specified)3 – 7 in Soil reaction (1:1 water)
(Depth not specified)0 Subsurface fragment volume <=3"
(Depth not specified)0 % Subsurface fragment volume >3"
(Depth not specified)0 % Ecological dynamics
The historic plant community of this ecological site is an oak-hickory forest. Common species on these sites may include black oak (Quercus velutina), white oak (Q. alba), chestnut oak (Q montana), shagbark hickory (Carya ovata), pignut hickory (Carya glabra), scarlet oak (Q. coccinea), flowering dogwood (Cornus florida), hophornbeam (Ostrya virginiana), and sassafras (Sassafras albidum). This site is naturally dominated by stable, uneven-aged forests with the canopy dynamics being driven by gap-phase regeneration.
Decades of disturbance (logging, grazing, fire suppression, etc.) have impacted these sites. Many sites now have a mixed hardwood forest with much less of an oak component that was historically present. Severe or long-term disturbances have transitioned sites toward a community of shade-tolerant species such as maple, ash and tulip poplar.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 - Disturbance; introduction of non-native plants T1B - Clearing; site preparation; seeding; agricultural management R2A - Brush control; weed control; timber stand improvement inputs T2A - Clearing; site preparation; tillage; seeding; weed control; agricultural management. T3A - Abandonment State 1 submodel, plant communities
State 2 submodel, plant communities
State 3 submodel, plant communities
3.1.A. - Planting; weed control; grassland management 3.2.A. - Site preparation; tillage; seeding; weed control; row crop management State 1
Reference StateThis ecological site is an oak-hickory forest. Tree species on these sites may include black oak (Quercus velutina), white oak (Q. alba), chestnut oak (Q montana), shagbark hickory (Carya ovata), pignut hickory (Carya glabra), scarlet oak (Q. coccinea), flowering dogwood (Cornus florida), hophornbeam (Ostrya virginiana), and sassafras (Sassafras albidum). Red maple (Acer rubrum) and black cherry (Prunus serotina) may be present. The herbaceous layer will vary depending on soil depth, rock content, and aspect, but often includes numerous vines, forbs, and herbs including: Vitis spp., Parthenocissus quinquefolia, Toxicodendron radicans, Botrychium virginianum, Carex spp., Agrimonia spp., Polygonatum biflorum, Maianthemum spp., Galium circaezans, Geranium maculatum, Aquilegia canadensis, Asarum canadense, Erythronium americanum, Mitchella repens, and Polystichum acrostichoides.
Dominant plant species
-
black oak (Quercus velutina), tree
-
white oak (Quercus alba), tree
-
pignut hickory (Carya glabra), tree
-
shagbark hickory (Carya ovata), tree
-
blueberry (Vaccinium), shrub
-
flowering dogwood (Cornus florida), shrub
-
ticktrefoil (Desmodium), other herbaceous
-
agrimony (Agrimonia), other herbaceous
-
bedstraw (Galium), other herbaceous
Community 1.1
Reference CommunityThis ecological site is a mature hardwood forest. Common species on these sites may include black oak (Quercus velutina), white oak (Q. alba), chestnut oak (Q montana), shagbark hickory (Carya ovata), pignut hickory (Carya glabra), scarlet oak (Q. coccinea), flowering dogwood (Cornus florida), hophornbeam (Ostrya virginiana), and sassafras (Sassafras albidum).
Dominant plant species
-
black oak (Quercus velutina), tree
-
white oak (Quercus alba), tree
-
pignut hickory (Carya glabra), tree
-
shagbark hickory (Carya ovata), tree
-
blueberry (Vaccinium), shrub
-
agrimony (Agrimonia), other herbaceous
-
ticktrefoil (Desmodium), other herbaceous
State 2
Invaded StateThis state is characterized by disturbance and subsequent increase in non-native invasive species. Species present will vary depending on disturbance severity and available seed sources.
Dominant plant species
-
oak (Quercus), tree
-
red maple (Acer rubrum), tree
-
hybrid hickory (Carya), tree
-
honeysuckle (Lonicera), shrub
-
spindletree (Euonymus), shrub
-
garlic mustard (Alliaria petiolata), other herbaceous
Community 2.1
Invaded communityThis state is characterized by the establishment and eventual dominance of invasive species in the understory. Species will depend upon disturbance and seed sources.
Sites can quickly be invaded by non-native plant species, and without management control, these prolific plants will alter the community composition of the understory/shrub layers and may negatively impact tree reproduction due to shading.Dominant plant species
-
oak (Quercus), tree
-
hybrid hickory (Carya), tree
-
red maple (Acer rubrum), tree
-
honeysuckle (Lonicera), shrub
-
spindletree (Euonymus), shrub
-
garlic mustard (Alliaria petiolata), other herbaceous
State 3
Agricultural StateThis state is characterized by the conversion of the site to agricultural use. Most common practice is a corn and soybean rotation of various types. A small portion of the historic acres are used for forage and pasture.
Some mapunits in this group are not appropriate for cropland due to high slopes, rock content, thin soils, and potential for erosion. Many of these sites are utilized as unmanaged pasture.Dominant plant species
-
tall fescue (Schedonorus arundinaceus), grass
-
brome (Bromus), grass
-
Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis), grass
-
white clover (Trifolium repens), other herbaceous
-
red clover (Trifolium pratense), other herbaceous
Community 3.1
CroplandThis state is characterized by the conversion of the site to agricultural use. Most common practice is a corn and soybean rotation of various types.
Many different crops and small grains may be grown on lower sloping sites - depending on management goals and objectives.
Note: Many mapunits in this group are not appropriate for cropland due to high slopes, thin soils, and potential for erosion.Community 3.2
PasturelandThis phase is characterized by forage or grazing agriculture. Different mixes of, generally, cool season grasses and forbs, largely clovers, are grown.
Some of the mapunits in this initial PES grouping have high slopes that would preclude mechanical management. Often these sites are best left in ungrazed forest to protect soil resources.Dominant plant species
-
tall fescue (Schedonorus arundinaceus), grass
-
brome (Bromus), grass
-
Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis), grass
Pathway 3.1.A.
Community 3.1 to 3.2Management inputs are required to transition a cropland community to a pasture community. Site preparation, seeding, and weed control will be required. Species planted will depend on management goals and objectives.
Pathway 3.2.A.
Community 3.2 to 3.1Planting, either by conventional or no-till methods, of row crop. Management that keeps the site in row crop production. Transitioning a pastureland to a crop field will require site preparation, seeding, and weed control. Species will depend on management goals and objectives. Note: some mapunits in this group are not suitable for cropland conversion due to thin soils and high slopes.
Transition T1A
State 1 to 2Disturbance and lack of post-management inputs can result in numerous non-native plants gaining a foothold on these sites. Species will depend upon seed sources introduced. Common invasives include honeysuckle, euonymus, and garlic mustard.
Transition T1B
State 1 to 3This state is characterized by the conversion of the site to agricultural use. Most common practice is a corn and soybean rotation of various types. Many different crops and small grains may be grown on lower sloping sites - depending on management goals and objectives. NOTE: Many mapunits in this group are not appropriate for cropland due to high slopes, thin soils, and potential for erosion.
Restoration pathway R2A
State 2 to 1Treatment and control of non-native vegetation will help restore these sites. Additional forest management activities may be needed including planting, selective thinning, and brush control.
Transition T2A
State 2 to 3Transitioning an invasive wooded state to an cropland or pastureland community will require substantial management inputs. Clearing, site preparation, seeding, and weed control will be required. Species will depend on management goals and objectives. For pastures, many landowners utilize mixes of, generally, cool season grasses and forbs, largely clovers, are grown. Transitioning to a crop field will also require site preparation, seeding, and weed control. Note: Some of the mapunits in this initial PES grouping have high slopes that would preclude mechanical management. Often these sites are best left in ungrazed forest to protect soil resources.
Restoration pathway T3A
State 3 to 2Agricultural sites that are abandoned will natural transition from a weedy herbaceous community to shrubs/saplings to a woodland state. Numerous non-native and native plants may be present depending on past use and adjacent seed sources. Fast growing trees such as maples, ash, locusts and poplars are often present on these sites.
Additional community tables
Table 7. Community 1.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 8. Community 2.1 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 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 will 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.
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.
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 regions 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
