Natural Resources
Conservation Service
Ecological site F114XA504IN
Sloping Till Upland Forest
Last updated: 9/26/2024
Accessed: 09/13/2026
-
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: CES202.898.
North-Central Interior Dry-Mesic Oak Forest and Woodland- CES202.046Ecological site concept
The Sloping Till Upland Forest reference community is a mature mixed hardwood forest with an oak component. Multiple tree species may share dominance on these sites including white oak, hickory, black walnut, sugar maple, basswood, northern red oak, white ash,. Other species include eastern black cherry, American elm, beech, and tulip poplar. Quality sites will have a wonderfully diverse understory community of native herbs and forbs, including an array of native spring wildflowers.
Few high-quality, old-growth communities remain. Agriculture is the largest use of these soils in MLRA 114A. Most sites have incurred repeated disturbances including selective harvest (oak removal), clearing, grazing, invasive species and absence of natural fire regimes. Disturbance will transition this community to a woodland dominated by fast-growing, shade-tolerant species such as sugar maple, tulip poplar, white ash, and beech. The resulting dense canopy shade on these sites often results in a more sparse understory community.Associated sites
F114XA502IN Till Uplands
These sites are generally lower on the landscape and less well drained.
Similar sites
F114XA305IN Non-Acidic Upland Forest
This group is a well-drained oak-hickory forest but is on limestone residuum and/or limestone and calcareous shale.
Table 1. Dominant plant species
Tree (1) Quercus alba
(2) Carya ovataShrub (1) Viburnum acerifolium
(2) Ostrya virginianaHerbaceous (1) Trillium
(2) Parthenocissus quinquefoliaPhysiographic features
These soils are on sloping till. Slopes are generally 12- 40%.
Figure 1. Physiographic Image - Block diagram with Hickory soils on the landscape.
Figure 2. Physiographic Image - Block diagram with Grayford and Ryker soils on the landscape.
Table 2. Representative physiographic features
Landforms (1) Upland > Till plain
Runoff class Low to high Flooding frequency None Ponding frequency None Elevation 350 – 1200 ft Slope 12 – 35 % Water table depth 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 2 – 60 % 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) 180-190 days Precipitation total (characteristic range) 40-50 in Frost-free period (actual range) 150-160 days Freeze-free period (actual range) 180-190 days Precipitation total (actual range) 40-50 in Frost-free period (average) 160 days Freeze-free period (average) 180 days Precipitation total (average) 50 in Characteristic rangeActual rangeBarLineFigure 3. Monthly precipitation range
Characteristic rangeActual rangeBarLineFigure 4. Monthly minimum temperature range
Characteristic rangeActual rangeBarLineFigure 5. Monthly maximum temperature range
BarLineFigure 6. Monthly average minimum and maximum temperature
Figure 7. Annual precipitation pattern
Figure 8 Annual average temperature pattern
Climate stations used
-
(1) NORTH VERNON 2 ESE [USC00126435], North Vernon, IN
-
(2) MILFORD [USC00335268], Milford, OH
-
(3) HILLSBORO [USC00333758], Hillsboro, OH
-
(4) SEYMOUR 2 N [USC00127935], Seymour, IN
">Influencing water features
These sites are not influenced by riparian or wetland features.
Soil features
The soils in this group are very deep, well drained, with a slope in excess of 12% and located on till plains. Series include Bonnell, Grayford, Hickory, Ryker, Weisburg.
Table 5. Representative soil features
Parent material (1) Till
(2) Residuum – limestone
(3) Residuum – limestone and shale
(4) Loess
Surface texture (1) Silt loam
(2) Silty clay loam
(3) Clay loam
(4) Loam
Drainage class Well drained Permeability class Slow to moderate Depth to restrictive layer 35 – 50 in Soil depth 60 – 80 in Surface fragment cover <=3" 1 – 25 % Surface fragment cover >3" 1 – 25 % Available water capacity
(Depth not specified)5 – 7 in Calcium carbonate equivalent
(Depth not specified)0 – 8 % Soil reaction (1:1 water)
(Depth not specified)5 – 7 Subsurface fragment volume <=3"
(Depth not specified)0 – 20 % Subsurface fragment volume >3"
(Depth not specified)0 – 20 % Table 6. Representative soil features (actual values)
Drainage class Not specified Permeability class Not specified Depth to restrictive layer 14 – 80 in Soil depth 0 in Surface fragment cover <=3" 0 % Surface fragment cover >3" 0 % Available water capacity
(Depth not specified)0 in Calcium carbonate equivalent
(Depth not specified)0 % 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
Reference sites are a mature hardwood forest with a substantial oak component. Multiple species may be co-dominant. White oak, shagbark hickory, sugar maple, white ash, black walnut and American beech are common. The subcanopy will include eastern black cherry (Prunus serotina), sassafras (Sassafras albidum), and red maple (Acer rubrum). The shrub layer can be quite variable but may include flowering dogwood (Cornus florida), alternative leaf dogwood (Cornus alternifolia), Virginia creeper (Parthenocissus quinquefolia), maple-leaf viburnum (Viburnum acerifolium), Allegheny serviceberry (Amelanchier laevis), common serviceberry (Amelanchier arborea), prickly ash (Zanthoxylum americanum), and hophornbeam (Ostrya virginiana).
The herbaceous layer is often quite diverse and will vary from site to site. Species may include tall thimbleweed (Anemone virginiana), rattlesnake fern (Botrychium virginianum), broadleaf enchanters’ nightshade (Circaea lutetiana ssp. Canadensis), ticktrefoil (Desmodium ssp.), bedstraw (Galium spp.), spotted geranium (Geranium maculatum), Clayton’s Sweetroot (Osmorhiza claytonii), snakeroot (Sanicula spp.), and feathery false lily of the valley (Maianthemum racemosum). At the forest edge or in sunny openings, species such as the common blue aster (Symphyotrichum cordifolium) and bearded shorthusk (Brachyelytrum erectum) occur.
Disturbances such as selective harvest, clear cutting, grazing, recreational uses, invasive plants, and fire suppression have transitioned most remaining wooded sites to a mesic woodland dominated by sugar maple, red maple, white ash, American beech, and tulip poplar. Understory composition and tree regeneration on these sites is altered due to heavy shade, lack of natural fire, and thick leaf litter.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; invasion of non-native species T1B - Tree clearing; brush and weed control; planting of desire species; agricultural management R2A - Brush control; weed control; planting of desired species; continual management inputs T3A - Abandonment State 1 submodel, plant communities
State 2 submodel, plant communities
State 3 submodel, plant communities
3.1.A - Site preparation; tillage; seeding; weed control; grassland management 3.2.A - Site preparation; tillage; seeding; weed control; row crop management State 1
ForestlandHistorically these sites had a variable canopy cover with dominants such as white oak (Quercus alba), black oak (Quercus velutina), and shagbark hickory (Carya ovata). Associates will usually include sugar maple (Acer saccharum), mockernut hickory ( Cary tomentosa), black walnut (Juglans nigra), and tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera). The subcanopy will include eastern black cherry (Prunus serotina), sassafras (Sassafras albidum), and red maple (Acer rubrum)
The shrub layer is often quite variable but may include flowering dogwood (Cornus florida), alternative leaf dogwood (Cornus alternifolia), maple-leaf viburnum (Viburnum acerifolium), common serviceberry (Amelanchier arborea), prickly ash (Zanthoxylum americanum), and hophornbeam (Ostrya virginiana).
The herbaceous layer will be a diverse mix of native perennial herbs and forbs.Dominant plant species
-
white oak (Quercus alba), tree
-
shagbark hickory (Carya ovata), tree
-
sugar maple (Acer saccharum), tree
-
dogwood (Cornus), shrub
-
viburnum (Viburnum), shrub
-
hophornbeam (Ostrya virginiana), shrub
-
Virginia creeper (Parthenocissus quinquefolia), other herbaceous
-
trillium (Trillium), other herbaceous
-
American lopseed (Phryma leptostachya), other herbaceous
Community 1.1
ForestlandThe reference community of these sites is a mature deciduous forest with a dominant oak-hickory component.
Dominant plant species
-
white oak (Quercus alba), tree
-
shagbark hickory (Carya ovata), tree
-
viburnum (Viburnum), shrub
-
dogwood (Cornus), shrub
-
hophornbeam (Ostrya virginiana), shrub
-
Virginia creeper (Parthenocissus quinquefolia), other herbaceous
-
trillium (Trillium), other herbaceous
-
American lopseed (Phryma leptostachya), other herbaceous
State 2
Disturbed - Invaded StateThis state is characterized by a substantial disturbance with a subsequent increase in non-native vegetation that is altering the ecological diversity of the sites. Numerous species may be present depending on the available seed source.
Dominant plant species
-
oak (Quercus), tree
-
maple (Acer), tree
-
tuliptree (Liriodendron tulipifera), tree
-
honeysuckle (Lonicera), shrub
-
autumn olive (Elaeagnus umbellata), shrub
-
Nepalese browntop (Microstegium vimineum), grass
-
garlic mustard (Alliaria petiolata), other herbaceous
-
Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), other herbaceous
-
winter creeper (Euonymus fortunei), other herbaceous
Community 2.1
Disturbed-Invaded CommunityThis state is characterized by the establishment of invasive plants. Species will depend upon the type and severity of disturbance and the available seed sources. Numerous species are possible. The density of shrubs in the understory will eventually impact tree regeneration.
Dominant plant species
-
oak (Quercus), tree
-
maple (Acer), tree
-
tuliptree (Liriodendron tulipifera), tree
-
honeysuckle (Lonicera), shrub
-
autumn olive (Elaeagnus umbellata), shrub
-
Nepalese browntop (Microstegium vimineum), grass
-
garlic mustard (Alliaria petiolata), other herbaceous
-
Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), other herbaceous
-
winter creeper (Euonymus fortunei), other herbaceous
State 3
Agricultural StateThis state is generally row crops (corn and bean rotation is common) or pasture/forage production.
Some mapunits in the initial PES groups have slopes that are not suitable for row crop production due to high risk of soil erosion and difficulty utilizing mechanical equipment.Community 3.1
CroplandSome of the lower sloping mapunits in this PES group may be appropriate for cropland, however, many sites have slopes that preclude crop production due to soil erosion and potential water quality impacts.
Dominant plant species
-
corn (Zea mays), other herbaceous
-
soybean (Glycine max), other herbaceous
Community 3.2
PasturelandSpecies selected for this use will vary depending on management goals and objectives. Commonly, cool season grasses such as tall fescue are seeded. White or red clover are often in the seeding mix. Multiple species of warm or cool season grasses may be planted on these sites.
Dominant plant species
-
brome (Bromus), grass
-
tall fescue (Schedonorus arundinaceus), 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 3.2Transitioning cropland to pastureland would require site preparation, seeding of desired species, and weed control. species selection will depend upon management goals and objectives.
Pathway 3.2.A
Community 3.2 to 3.1Transitioning from a pastureland to a cropland will require multiple management inputs such as site preparation, seeding desired species, and weed control.
Transition T1A
State 1 to 2Major disturbance followed by an Invasion of non-native vegetation that changes the community structure of the sites.
Transition T1B
State 1 to 3Conversion to cropland or pastureland will require tree removal, brush control, weed control, and seeding of desired species. Plant selection will depend on management goals. Due to slope, some mapunits are not be suitable for cropland conversion due to slope.
Restoration pathway R2A
State 2 to 1Restoration inputs will include long-term brush control and weed control. Planting native species may be needed along with timber stand improvement inputs.
Transition T2A
State 2 to 3Conversion to cropland or pastureland will require tree removal, brush control, weed control, and seeding of desired species. Plant selection will depend on management goals. Due to slope, some mapunits are not be suitable for cropland conversion due to slope.
Transition T3A
State 3 to 2Properties that are abandoned move through a series of successional plant communities to an eventual woodland. Species depend on previous uses and available seed sources.
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 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.
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 MLRAs often split counties and/or shared similar soil series with MLRA 114A. USDA-NRCS county soil surveys for the counties within MLRA 114A where a valuable reference including tree species observed on site by NRCS staff. 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 09/13/2026 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
