Natural Resources
Conservation Service
Ecological site F116CY005MO
Dry Igneous Protected Backslope Woodland
Last updated: 9/24/2020
Accessed: 07/06/2026
-
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): 116C–St. Francois Knobs and Basins
The St Francois Knobs and Basins is the structural center of the Ozark Dome. Elevation ranges from about 450 feet along the rivers in the southern part of the area, to 1,772 feet on the summit of Taum Sauk Mountain, the highest point in Missouri. Prominent features of this MLRA are the Precambrian igneous knobs and hills that rise conspicuously to various elevations, interspersed with smooth-floored basins and valleys overlying dolomite and sandstone. Ecological Sites defined for this MLRA are associated with the igneous parent materials, either in knob or basin positions. Areas influenced primarily by dolomite and/or sandstone are included in ecological sites within MLRA 116A (Ozark Highlands).
Classification relationships
Terrestrial Natural Community Type (Nelson, 2010):
The reference state for this ecological site is most similar to a Dry-Mesic Igneous Woodland.
Missouri Department of Conservation Forest and Woodland Communities (Missouri Department of Conservation, 2006):
The reference state for this ecological site is most similar to a Mixed Oak Woodland.
National Vegetation Classification System Vegetation Association (NatureServe, 2010):
The reference state for this ecological site is most similar to a Quercus stellata - Quercus marilandica - Quercus velutina - Carya texana / Schizachyrium scoparium Woodland (CEGL002149).
Geographic relationship to the Missouri Ecological Classification System (Nigh & Schroeder, 2002):
This ecological site occurs primarily within the St. Francois Igneous Glade/Oak Forest Knobs Land Type Association.Ecological site concept
NOTE: This is a “provisional” Ecological Site Description (ESD) that is under development. It contains basic ecological information that can be used for conservation planning, application and land management. As additional information is collected, analyzed and reviewed, this ESD will be refined and published as “Approved”.
Dry Igneous Protected Backslope Woodlands occupy the northerly and easterly aspects of steep, dissected slopes, and are mapped in complex with the Dry Igneous Exposed Backslope Woodland ecological site. These sites occur throughout the area, and on outlying igneous knobs in adjacent counties. Soils are moderately deep, with abundant volcanic rock fragments, and are low in bases. These sites are often downslope from both Igneous Upland Woodland and Shallow Igneous Knob Glade ecological sites. Igneous Upland Woodland sites do not have root-restricting bedrock in the upper part of the soil profile, whereas Shallow Igneous Knob Glade sites are shallow to bedrock and are interspersed with rock outcrop. Vegetation of the reference state is woodland dominated by white oak, black oak, and scarlet oak, and a ground flora of native grasses and forbs.Associated sites
F116CY003MO Dry Igneous Upland Woodland
Dry Igneous Upland Woodlands are typically upslope from Igneous Protected Backslope Woodlands, and are less sloping.
F116CY004MO Igneous Protected Backslope Forest
Igneous Protected Backslope Forests are typically downslope from Igneous Protected Backslope Woodlands, and do not have bedrock within the soil profile.
F116CY011MO Dry Igneous Exposed Backslope Woodland
Dry Igneous Exposed Backslope Woodlands are on south and west facing slopes, and are mapped in a complex with this ecological site.
Similar sites
F116CY003MO Dry Igneous Upland Woodland
Dry Igneous Upland Woodlands are typically upslope from Dry Igneous Protected Backslope Woodlands, and are less sloping and somewhat more productive due to the deeper soil depths.
Table 1. Dominant plant species
Tree (1) Quercus alba
(2) Quercus velutinaShrub (1) Sassafras albidum
(2) Rhus aromaticaHerbaceous (1) Carex
Physiographic features
This site is on upland backslopes with slopes of 15 to 50 percent. It is on protected aspects (north, northeast, and east), which receive significantly less solar radiation than the exposed aspects. The site receives runoff from upslope summit and shoulder sites, and generates runoff to adjacent, downslope ecological sites. This site does not flood.
The following figure (adapted from Simmons et al., 2006) shows the typical landscape position of this ecological site, and landscape relationships among the major ecological sites in the igneous uplands. The site is within the area labeled “3”, on the lower, steeper backslope positions.
Figure 2. Major ecological sites of the igneous uplands.
Table 2. Representative physiographic features
Landforms (1) Hill
(2) Knob
(3) Hillslope
Flooding frequency None Ponding frequency None Elevation 600 – 1600 ft Slope 15 – 50 % Water table depth 30 – 60 in Aspect NW, N, NE, E Climatic features
The St. Francois Knobs and Basins have a continental type of climate marked by strong seasonality. In winter, dry-cold air masses, unchallenged by any topographic barriers, periodically swing south from the northern plains and Canada. If they invade reasonably humid air, snowfall and rainfall result. In summer, moist, warm air masses, equally unchallenged by topographic barriers, swing north from the Gulf of Mexico and can produce abundant amounts of rain, either by fronts or by convectional processes. In some summers, high pressure stagnates over the region, creating extended droughty periods. Spring and fall are transitional seasons when abrupt changes in temperature and precipitation may occur due to successive, fast-moving fronts separating contrasting air masses.
The St. Francois Knobs and Basins experience few regional differences in climates. The average annual precipitation in this area is 42 to 46 inches. The average annual temperature is about 54 to 56 degrees F. The lower temperatures occur at the higher elevations. Mean July maximum temperatures have a range of only one or two degrees across the area.
Mean annual precipitation varies somewhat along a west to east gradient. The rainfall is fairly evenly distributed throughout the year. Snow falls nearly every winter, but the snow cover lasts for only a few days.
During years when precipitation is normal, moisture is stored in the soil profile during the winter and early spring, when evaporation and transpiration are low. During the summer months the loss of water by evaporation and transpiration is high, and if rainfall fails to occur at frequent intervals, drought will result. Drought directly affects plant and animal life by limiting water supplies, especially at times of high temperatures and high evaporation rates.
Superimposed upon the basic MLRA climatic patterns are local topographic influences that create topoclimatic, or microclimatic variations. For example, air drainage at night may produce temperatures several degrees lower in the basin and floodplain ecological sites downslope from this ecological site. At critical times during the year, this phenomenon may produce later spring or earlier fall freezes in basins and valleys. Nearby Glade ecological sites may have higher daytime temperatures due to bare rock and higher reflectivity of these un-vegetated surfaces. Slope orientation is an important topographic influence on climate. The protected (north- and east-facing) slopes that characterize this ecological site are regularly cooler and moister than nearby ecological sites on summits and on exposed slopes. Finally, the climate within closed-canopy woodland communities is measurably different from the climate of open-canopy woodlands within this ecological site.
References:
University of Missouri Climate Center - http://climate.missouri.edu/climate.php;
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. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 296.Table 3 Representative climatic features
Frost-free period (characteristic range) 140-150 days Freeze-free period (characteristic range) 160-170 days Precipitation total (characteristic range) 50-50 in Frost-free period (actual range) 140-150 days Freeze-free period (actual range) 160-170 days Precipitation total (actual range) 50-50 in Frost-free period (average) 140 days Freeze-free period (average) 170 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) ARCADIA [USC00230224], Arcadia, MO
-
(2) FARMINGTON [USC00232809], Farmington, MO
-
(3) FREDERICKTOWN [USC00233038], Fredericktown, MO
">Influencing water features
This ecological site is not influenced by wetland or riparian water features. The site generates runoff to adjacent, downslope ecological sites. The water features of this upland ecological site include evapotranspiration, surface runoff, and drainage. Each water balance component fluctuates to varying extents from year-to-year. Evapotranspiration remains the most constant. Precipitation and drainage are highly variable between years. Seasonal variability differs for each water component. Precipitation generally occurs as single day events. Evapotranspiration is lowest in the winter and peaks in the summer. Water stored as ice and snow decreases drainage and surface runoff rates throughout the winter and increases these fluxes in the spring. The surface runoff pulse is greatly influenced by extreme events. Conversion to cropland or other high intensities land uses tends to increase runoff, but also decreases evapotranspiration. Depending on the situation, this might increase groundwater discharge, and decrease baseflow in receiving streams.
Soil features
These soils have granitic or rhyolitic volcanic bedrock at 20 to 40 inches, and acidic subsoils that are low in bases. The soils were formed under woodland vegetation, and have thin, light-colored surface horizons. Parent material is slope alluvium and residuum weathered from granite and rhyolite. They have gravelly and cobbly silt loam surface horizons, and subsoils with moderate to high amounts of volcanic gravel and cobbles. They are not affected by seasonal wetness. Soil series associated with this site include Hassler, Irondale, and Syenite.
Table 4. Representative soil features
Parent material (1) Slope alluvium – rhyolite
(2) Residuum – rhyolite
Surface texture (1) Gravelly silt loam
(2) Cobbly silt loam
Family particle size (1) Loamy
Drainage class Moderately well drained to well drained Permeability class Moderately slow to moderate Soil depth 20 – 40 in Surface fragment cover <=3" 5 – 34 % Surface fragment cover >3" 3 – 14 % Available water capacity
(0-40in)2 – 4 in Calcium carbonate equivalent
(0-40in)Not specified Electrical conductivity
(0-40in)0 – 2 mmhos/cm Sodium adsorption ratio
(0-40in)Not specified Soil reaction (1:1 water)
(0-40in)3.5 – 6 Subsurface fragment volume <=3"
(Depth not specified)10 – 36 % Subsurface fragment volume >3"
(Depth not specified)7 – 25 % Ecological dynamics
Information contained in this section was developed using historical data, professional experience, field reviews, and scientific studies. The information presented is representative of very complex vegetation communities. Key indicator plants, animals and ecological processes are described to help inform land management decisions. Plant communities will differ across the MLRA because of the naturally occurring variability in weather, soils, and aspect. The Reference Plant Community is not necessarily the management goal. The species lists are representative and are not botanical descriptions of all species occurring, or potentially occurring, on this site. They are not intended to cover every situation or the full range of conditions, species, and responses for the site.
Dry Igneous Protected Backslope Woodlands have a moderately well-developed canopy (50 to 70 feet tall and 60 to 80 percent closure) dominated by white oak, black oak, and scarlet oak. Compared to exposed backslope forests, their overstory and understory is less open with a decrease in sun loving woodland ground flora. In addition, the protected landscape position of Dry Igneous Protected Backslope Woodlands helps to improve the growth of trees.
It is likely that this ecological site, along with adjacent glades and dry woodlands burned at least once every 5 years. These periodic fires kept woodlands open, removed the litter, and stimulated the growth and flowering of the grasses and forbs. During fire free intervals, woody species, especially black hickory, winged elm and eastern red cedar would have increased and the herbaceous understory diminished. The return of fire would have opened the woodlands up again and stimulated the abundant ground flora.
Dry Igneous Protected Backslope Woodlands were also subjected to occasional disturbances from wind and ice, as well as grazing by native large herbivores, such as bison, elk, and white-tailed deer. Wind and ice would have periodically opened the canopy up by knocking over trees or breaking substantial branches off canopy trees. Grazing by the large native herbivores would have effectively kept understory conditions more open, creating conditions more favorable to oak reproduction and sun-loving ground flora species.
In the long term absence of fire, woody species will encroach into these woodlands. This is especially true after grazing has reduced grass cover and exposed more surface to the dispersal of seeds by birds. Once established, these woodies can quickly fill the woodland system. Most of these ecological sites today are more dense and shady with a greatly diminished ground flora. Removal of the younger understory and the application of prescribed fire have proven to be effective management tools.
Today, uncontrolled domestic grazing is also impacting some of these sites, further diminishing the diversity of native plants and introducing species that are tolerant of grazing, such as coralberry, gooseberry, and Virginia creeper along with eastern redcedar. These grazed sites also have a more open understory in addition to soil compaction, soil erosion and lower site productivity problems.
Dry Igneous Protected Backslope Woodlands are somewhat moderately productive timber sites. Poorly managed timber harvests in this region typically results in removal of the most productive trees, or high-grading of the stand. This can result in poorer quality residual timber and a shift in species composition away from more valuable oak species. Carefully planned single tree selection or the creation of small group openings can help regenerate more desirable oak species and increase vigor on the residual trees.
Clear-cutting also occurs and results in dense, even-aged stands of primarily oak. This may be most beneficial for existing stands whose composition has been highly altered by past management practices. However, without some thinning of the dense stands and the introduction of prescribed burning, the ground flora diversity can be shaded out and productivity of the stand may suffer.
Prescribed fire can play a beneficial role in the management of this ecological site. The inclusion of protected backslope sites in larger burn units can add to the habitat diversity of the landscape.
A State and Transition Diagram follows. Detailed descriptions of each state, transition, plant community, and pathway follow the model. This model is based on available experimental research, field observations, professional consensus, and interpretations. It is likely to change as knowledge increases.State and transition model
Custom diagramStandard diagram
Figure 9. State and transition diagram for this ecological site
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
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
ReferenceThe historical reference state for this ecological site was old growth oak woodland. This state was dominated by white oak and black oak with occasional scarlet oak, and shortleaf pine. Periodic disturbances from fire, wind and ice maintained the reference structure and diverse ground flora species. Long disturbance-free periods allowed an increase in both the density of trees and the abundance of shade tolerant species. Two community phases are recognized in the reference state, with shifts between phases based on disturbance frequency. Reference sites are rare today.
Most of these sites have been subject to repeated, high-graded timber harvest (State 3). Fire suppression has resulted in increased canopy density, which has affected the abundance and diversity of ground flora (State 4). Relatively few igneous woodlands have been managed effectively for timber harvest (State 2), resulting in either even-age or uneven-age woodlands.Community 1.1
White Oak - Black Oak/Sassafras - Fragrant Sumac/ SedgeForest overstory.Canopy cover ranges from 60 to 80 percent. White oak and black oak dominate with scattered northern red oak and black gum. Shortleaf pine occurs on some sites. The Overstory Species list is based commonly occurring species listed in Nelson (2010).
Forest understory. Two understory layers are present - 20 to 40 foot tall small tree layer and a dense native forb and grass ground layer with scattered shrubs. The Understory Species list is based commonly occurring species listed in Nelson (2010).
Dominant plant species
-
white oak (Quercus alba), tree
-
black oak (Quercus velutina), tree
-
scarlet oak (Quercus coccinea), tree
-
blackgum (Nyssa sylvatica), tree
-
pignut hickory (Carya glabra), tree
-
shortleaf pine (Pinus echinata), tree
-
northern red oak (Quercus rubra), tree
-
sassafras (Sassafras albidum), tree
-
red maple (Acer rubrum), tree
-
slippery elm (Ulmus rubra), tree
-
fragrant sumac (Rhus aromatica), shrub
-
Carolina rose (Rosa carolina), shrub
-
deerberry (Vaccinium stamineum), shrub
-
Blue Ridge blueberry (Vaccinium pallidum), shrub
-
ribbed sedge (Carex virescens), grass
-
rosy sedge (Carex rosea), grass
-
whitetinge sedge (Carex albicans), grass
-
little bluestem (Schizachyrium scoparium), grass
-
hairy woodland brome (Bromus pubescens), grass
-
Virginia wildrye (Elymus virginicus), grass
-
fuzzy wuzzy sedge (Carex hirsutella), grass
-
parasol sedge (Carex umbellata), grass
-
poverty oatgrass (Danthonia spicata), grass
-
cypress panicgrass (Dichanthelium dichotomum), grass
-
nakedflower ticktrefoil (Desmodium nudiflorum), other herbaceous
-
fourleaf milkweed (Asclepias quadrifolia), other herbaceous
-
elmleaf goldenrod (Solidago ulmifolia), other herbaceous
-
downy ragged goldenrod (Solidago petiolaris), other herbaceous
-
pointedleaf ticktrefoil (Desmodium glutinosum), other herbaceous
-
hairy sunflower (Helianthus hirsutus), other herbaceous
-
eastern beebalm (Monarda bradburiana), other herbaceous
-
violet lespedeza (Lespedeza violacea), other herbaceous
-
fourleaf yam (Dioscorea quaternata), other herbaceous
-
spotted geranium (Geranium maculatum), other herbaceous
Community 1.2
White Oak - Black Oak/ Fragrant Sumac - Oak Saplings /Virginia WildryePathway P1.1A
Community 1.1 to 1.2Fire-free interval 10+ years
Pathway P1.2A
Community 1.2 to 1.1Fire interval 5-7 years
State 2
Timber Managed Mixed Oak WoodlandPeriodic timber management, along with the absence of fire, will maintain this state. Continued exclusion of prescribed fire without a regular 15 to 20 year harvest re-entry into these stands, will slowly create an increase in more shade tolerant species. White oak will become less dominant and mid-story species such as sassafras, serviceberry and hickory will become more dominate and cause a transition to community phase 2.2.
Dominant resource concerns
-
Plant structure and composition
Community 2.1
White Oak-Black Oak/Oak & Hickory SaplingsCommunity 2.2
White Oak-Black Oak/Sassafras-Downy ServiceberryPathway P2.1A
Community 2.1 to 2.220-30 years of limited logging disturbance
Pathway P2.2A
Community 2.2 to 2.1Managed forest harvesting; fire suppression
State 3
High Graded Mixed Oak WoodlandThis state is subjected to repeated, high-graded timber harvests resulting in a significant reduction in white oak densities. Fire cessation has also occurred. This state exhibits an over-abundance of black oak and hickory and other less desirable tree species, and weedy understory species such as coralberry, gooseberry, poison ivy and Virginia creeper. The canopy is somewhat open. Some intermittent uncontrolled domestic livestock grazing may also occur further degrading the site. Proper forest management techniques and cessation of grazing can cause a transition to State 2.
Dominant resource concerns
-
Ephemeral gully erosion
-
Organic matter depletion
-
Plant productivity and health
-
Plant structure and composition
-
Plant pest pressure
-
Wildfire hazard from biomass accumulation
-
Terrestrial habitat for wildlife and invertebrates
Community 3.1
Oak-Hickory/Red Maple/BuckbrushState 4
Fire Exclusion Mixed Oak Woodland/ForestThis state is dominated by black oak, scarlet oak and to a lesser extent white oak. They can form relatively even-age stands, dating to when fire suppression became the dominant management characteristic on the site. This stage can occur relatively quickly (20 to 25 years). Canopy closures can approach 80 to 90 percent with decreasing ground flora. Without active management or long term presence of fire, woody species will continue to encroach into these woodlands. Once established, these woody species can quickly fill the forest system.
Most occurrences of this state today are dense and shady with a greatly diminished ground flora. Some logging typically occurs. They are good wildlife sites. Removal of the younger understory, opening the upper canopy, and the application of periodic prescribed fire (5-7 years) has proven to be effective management tools in restoring the stage back to the reference state.Dominant resource concerns
-
Plant productivity and health
-
Plant structure and composition
-
Plant pest pressure
-
Wildfire hazard from biomass accumulation
Community 4.1
Black Oak-Scarlet Oak-White Oak/Red Maple-Oak & Hickory Saplings/TicktrefoilState 5
GrasslandConversion of forested sites to planted, non-native grassland species such as tall fescue is a stage that is primarily associated with upper slope positions of this ecological site. If active grassland management is discontinued, the site will eventually transition to Phase 5.2 with an increase in broomsedge and oak sprouts and a loss of clover species. Return to the reference state from this state may be impossible requiring a very long term series of management options and stages. Many species may need to be eventually planted or reseeded to restore the system.
Studies on Ozark woodlands indicate that conversion to grassland may result in soil loss from the clearing process and from erosion before the grassland is well established. Long-term grassland management results in higher soil pH levels and higher levels of calcium and magnesium from pasture liming. These effects may extend a foot or more into the soil profile. The effects of liming are more evident in phase 5.1 (Tall fescue – red clover – birdsfoot trefoil).
Community 5.1
Tall Fescue - Red Clover - Bird'sfoot TrefoilCommunity 5.2
Tall fescue - Broomsedge Bluestem/Oak SproutsDominant resource concerns
-
Sheet and rill erosion
-
Ephemeral gully erosion
-
Nutrients transported to surface water
-
Plant productivity and health
-
Plant structure and composition
-
Plant pest pressure
-
Terrestrial habitat for wildlife and invertebrates
-
Feed and forage imbalance
Pathway P5.1A
Community 5.1 to 5.2Over grazing; no fertilization
Pathway P5.2A
Community 5.2 to 5.1Brush management; grassland seeding; grassland management
Transition T1C
State 1 to 2Managed forest harvesting; fire suppression
Transition T1B
State 1 to 3Logging – high grading; periodic grazing
Transition T1A
State 1 to 4Fire suppression; some logging
Restoration pathway R2A
State 2 to 1Selective thinning and prescribed fire interval 5-7 years
Transition T2A
State 2 to 3Logging – high grading; periodic grazing
Transition T3B
State 3 to 2Logging cessation; selective thinning
Transition T3A
State 3 to 5Clearing; grassland seeding; grassland management
Restoration pathway R4A
State 4 to 1Selective thinning and prescribed fire interval 5-7 years
Transition T4A
State 4 to 2Selective thinning and prescribed fire interval 5-7 years
Transition T5B
State 5 to 3Logging – high grading; periodic grazing
Restoration pathway T5A
State 5 to 4Cessation of grazing and haying; long term succession
Additional community tables
Table 5. Community 1.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 6. Community 1.1 forest overstory composition
Common name Symbol Scientific name Nativity Height ft Canopy cover (%) Diameter in Basal area (square ft/acre) Treewhite oak QUAL Quercus alba Native – 10-30 – 0 black oak QUVE Quercus velutina Native – 10-30 – 0 blackgum NYSY Nyssa sylvatica Native – 10-20 – 0 scarlet oak QUCO2 Quercus coccinea Native – 10-20 – 0 pignut hickory CAGL8 Carya glabra Native – 5-20 – 0 shortleaf pine PIEC2 Pinus echinata Native – 0-10 – 0 Table 7. Community 1.1 forest understory composition
Common name Symbol Scientific name Nativity Height (ft) Canopy cover (%) Grass/grass-like (Graminoids)rosy sedge CARO22 Carex rosea Native – 5–20 little bluestem SCSC Schizachyrium scoparium Native – 5–20 hairy woodland brome BRPU6 Bromus pubescens Native – 5–20 whitetinge sedge CAAL25 Carex albicans Native – 5–20 Virginia wildrye ELVI3 Elymus virginicus Native – 5–20 ribbed sedge CAVI4 Carex virescens Native – 5–20 Forb/Herbbristly buttercup RAHI Ranunculus hispidus Native – 5–10 elmleaf goldenrod SOUL2 Solidago ulmifolia Native – 5–10 fire pink SIVI4 Silene virginica Native – 5–10 downy ragged goldenrod SOPE Solidago petiolaris Native – 5–10 pointedleaf ticktrefoil DEGL5 Desmodium glutinosum Native – 5–10 manyray aster SYAN2 Symphyotrichum anomalum Native – 5–10 hairy sunflower HEHI2 Helianthus hirsutus Native – 5–10 rue anemone THTH2 Thalictrum thalictroides Native – 5–10 eastern beebalm MOBR2 Monarda bradburiana Native – 5–10 spotted geranium GEMA Geranium maculatum Native – 5–10 American ipecac GIST5 Gillenia stipulata Native – 5–10 nakedflower ticktrefoil DENU4 Desmodium nudiflorum Native – 5–10 fourleaf milkweed ASQU Asclepias quadrifolia Native – 5–10 Shrub/Subshrubfragrant sumac RHAR4 Rhus aromatica Native – 10–20 lowbush blueberry VAAN Vaccinium angustifolium Native – 5–20 Treesassafras SAAL5 Sassafras albidum Native – 5–20 red maple ACRU Acer rubrum Native – 5–10 Table 8. Community 1.2 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 9. Community 2.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 10. Community 2.2 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 11. Community 3.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 12. Community 4.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 13. Community 5.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 14. Community 5.2 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Interpretations
Animal community
Wildlife (MDC 2006)
Oaks on this site provide abundant hard mast; scattered shrubs provide soft mast; native legumes provide high-quality wildlife food.
Sedges and native cool-season grasses provide green browse; native warm-season grasses provide cover and nesting habitat; and a diversity of forbs provides a diversity and abundance of insects.
Post-burn areas can provide temporary bare-ground and herbaceous cover habitat is important for turkey poults and quail chicks.
Birds species associated with this site are Indigo Bunting, Red-headed Woodpecker, Eastern Bluebird, Northern Bobwhite, Summer Tanager, Eastern Wood-Pewee, Whip-poor-will, Chuck-will’s widow, Red-eyed Vireo, Rose-breasted Grosbeak, Yellow-billed Cuckoo, and Broad-winged Hawk.
Reptile and amphibian species include ornate box turtle, northern fence lizard, five-lined skink, broad-headed skink, six-lined racerunner, flat-headed snake, rough earth snake, and timber rattlesnake.Other information
Forestry (NRCS 2002; 20014)
Management: Field measured site index values average 62 for white oak and 51 for northern red oak. Timber management opportunities are fair. Create group openings of at least 2 acres. Large clearcuts should be minimized if possible to reduce impacts on wildlife and aesthetics. Uneven-aged management using single tree selection or small group selection cuttings of ½ to 1 acre are other options that can be used if clear cutting is not desired or warranted. Using prescribed fire as a management tool could have a negative impact on timber quality and should be used with caution on a site if timber management is the primary objective.
Limitations: Large amounts of coarse fragments throughout profile; bedrock may be within 60 inches. Surface stones and rocks are problems for efficient and safe equipment operation and will make equipment use somewhat difficult. Disturbing the surface excessively in harvesting operations and building roads increases soil losses, which leaves a greater amount of coarse fragments on the surface. Hand planting or direct seeding may be necessary. Seedling mortality due to low available water capacity may be high. Mulching or providing shade can improve seedling survival. Mechanical tree planting will be limited. Erosion is a hazard when slopes exceed 15 percent. On steep slopes greater than 35 percent, traction problems increase and equipment use is not recommended.Supporting information
Inventory data references
Potential Reference Sites: Dry Igneous Protected Backslope Woodland Plot HUMOCA02 – Irondale soil Located in Hughes Mountain CA, Washington County, MO Latitude: 37.809088 Longitude: -90.71103 Plot PERACA07 – Irondale soil Located in Peck Ranch CA, Carter County, MO Latitude: 37.077728 Longitude: -91.20008 Plot PRHOGO03 – Irondale soil Located in Prairie Hollow Gorge NA, Shannon County, MO Latitude: 37.181058 Longitude: -91.260433
Other references
Batek, M.J., A.J. Rebertus, W.A. Schroeder, T.L. Haithcoat, E. Compas, and R.P. Guyette. 1999. Reconstruction of early nineteenth-century vegetation and fire regimes in the Missouri Ozarks. Journal of Biogeography 26:397-412.
Conant, R. T., K. Paustian, and E. T. Elliott. 2001. Grassland management and conversion
into grassland: effects on soil carbon. Ecological Applications, 11(2). pp. 343–355
Frost, C., 1996. Pre-settlement Fire Frequency Regimes of the United States: A First
Approximation. Pages 70-81, Proceedings of the 20nd Tall Timbers Fire Ecology
Conference: Fire in Ecosystem Management: Shifting the Paradigm from Suppression to
Prescription. Tall Timbers Research Station, Tallahassee, FL.
Guyette, R.P. and B.E. Cutter. 1991. Tree-ring analysis of fire history of a post oak
savanna in the Missouri Ozarks. Natural Areas Journal 11: 93-99.
Harlan, J.D., T.A. Nigh and W.A. Schroeder. 2001. The Missouri original General Land Office survey notes project. University of Missouri, Columbia.
Ladd, D. 1991. Reexamination of the role of fire in Missouri oak woodlands. Pp. 67-80 in
G.V. Brown, James K.; Smith, Jane Kapler, eds. 2000. Wildland fire in ecosystems: effects
of fire on flora. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-42-vol. 2. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 257 p.
Missouri Natural Heritage Inventory Database. 2013. Woodland element occurrence
records. Missouri Department of Conservation. Jefferson City, Missouri.
Missouri Department of Conservation, 2006. Missouri Forest and Woodland Community
Profiles. Jefferson City, Missouri.
National Vegetation Classification System Vegetation Association. 2010.
http://www.natureserve.org/prodServices/ecomapping.jsp
Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2002. Woodland Suitability Groups. Missouri
FOTG, Section II, Soil Interpretations and Reports. 30 pgs.
Natural Resources Conservation Service. Site Index Reports. Accessed May 2014.
https://esi.sc.egov.usda.gov/ESI_Forestland/pgFSWelcome.aspx
Nelson, P. W. 2010. The Terrestrial Natural Communities of Missouri. Missouri Department
of Conservation, Jefferson City, Missouri. 550 p.
Nigh, T. A., and W. A. Schroeder. 2002. Atlas of Missouri Ecoregions. Missouri
Department of Conservation, Jefferson City, Missouri. 212 p.
Schellberg, J., B. Möseler, W. Kühbauch and A. Rademacher. 1999. Long-term effects of
fertilizer on soil nutrient concentration, yield, forage quality and floristic composition of a
hay meadow in the Eifel Mountains, Germany. Grass and Forage Science, 54: 195–207.
Schoolcraft, H.R. 1821. Journal of a tour into the interior of Missouri and Arkansas from Potosi, or Mine a Burton, in Missouri territory, in a southwest direction, toward the Rocky Mountains: performed in the years 1818 and 1819. Richard Phillips and Company, London.
Simmons, M., J. D. Childress, K. Godsey, and R. Taylor. 2006. Soil Survey of Reynolds
County, Missouri. U.S. Dept. of Agric. Natural Resources Conservation Service.
United States Department of Agriculture – Natural Resource Conservation Service (USDA-NRCS). 2006. Land Resource Regions and Major Land Resource Areas of the United States, the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 296. 682 pgs.
Yatskievych, George A. 1999/2006/2013. Flora of Missouri. Missouri Dept. of Conservation
in cooperation with Missouri Botanical Garden Press, Volumes 1-3.Contributors
Doug Wallace
Fred YoungApproval
Nels Barrett, 9/24/2020
Acknowledgments
Missouri Department of Conservation and Missouri Department of Natural Resources personnel provided significant and helpful field and technical support in the development of this ecological site.
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 09/10/2020 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
