Ecological site F125XY002WV

F125XY001WV	Sandstone Residuum
F125XY003WV	Interbedded Sedimentary Uplands
F125XY004WV	Floodplain Alluvium
F125XY005WV	Low Stream Terrace Alluvium

F125XY001WV	Sandstone Residuum

Tree	(1) Liriodendron tulipifera (2) Quercus
Shrub	(1) Kalmia latifolia (2) Rhododendron maximum
Herbaceous	(1) Dichanthelium boscii

Landforms	(1) Hill (2) Mountain (3) Plateau
Flooding frequency	None
Elevation	551 – 3592 ft
Slope	5 – 80 %
Water table depth	9 – 60 in
Aspect	N, S

Frost-free period (average)	160 days
Freeze-free period (average)	190 days
Precipitation total (average)	50 in

Parent material	(1) Colluvium – acid shale (2) Creep deposits – sandstone (3) Residuum – siltstone
Surface texture	(1) Channery clay (2) Cobbly clay loam (3) Extremely stony fine sandy loam
Family particle size	(1) Loamy
Drainage class	Somewhat poorly drained to excessively drained
Permeability class	Slow to rapid
Soil depth	18 – 86 in
Surface fragment cover <=3"	0 – 70 %
Surface fragment cover >3"	0 – 70 %
Available water capacity (0-40in)	0.3 – 8.1 in
Soil reaction (1:1 water) (0-40in)	4.5 – 6.4
Subsurface fragment volume <=3" (Depth not specified)	0 – 46 %
Subsurface fragment volume >3" (Depth not specified)	0 – 65 %

Ecological dynamics

Information contained in this section was adapted from several sources. 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.

Most areas are in forest but less steep areas are used mainly for pasture and small field crops. The forest vegetation is chiefly yellow-poplar, upland oaks, Virginia and shortleaf pine and hickory. The dominance of one species over another depends on local soil properties that can vary across the extent of this site. On shallow, sandy acidic soils pine will be more important. Historical disturbances including logging, fire, and the southern pine beetle are important drivers in these areas. Pine species may require management, such as prescribed burning, to maintain dominance. In areas where soils are deeper and more productive, hardwoods will become more important. Regardless, forestry is the most important land-use. Site indices for timber species are higher on north-facing aspects, which are more productive. This site also has considerable wildlife value and watershed conservation value.

State and transition model

Custom diagram

Standard diagram

Figure 7. State and Transition Model

More interactive model formats are also available. View Interactive Models

More interactive model formats are also available. View Interactive Models
Click on state and transition labels to scroll to the respective text

State 1
Upland Forest State

Depending on local conditions, forest composition can vary but in general will consist of closed-canopy hardwoods. These forest sites are typically more productive than some other PESs in this MLRA.

Community 1.1
Southern and Central Appalachian Cove Forest

If the NatureServe classification for Southern and Central Appalachian Cove Forest applies to most of this PES, it can be described as follows:

"This system consists of mesophytic hardwood or hemlock-hardwood forests of sheltered topographic positions in the Southern Blue Ridge and central Appalachian Mountains. Examples are generally found on concave slopes that promote moist conditions. The system includes a mosaic of acidic and "rich" coves that may be distinguished by individual plant communities based on perceived differences in soil fertility and species richness (rich examples have higher diversity and density in the herbaceous layer). Both acidic and rich coves may occur in the same site, with the acidic coves potentially creeping out of the draw-up to at least midslope on well-protected north-facing slopes. Characteristic species in the canopy include Aesculus flava, Acer saccharum, Fraxinus americana, Tilia americana, Carya cordiformis, Liriodendron tulipifera, Halesia tetraptera, Tsuga canadensis, Fagus grandifolia, Magnolia acuminata, and Magnolia fraseri."

State 2
Pasture

Managed pasture for a variety of livestock is a typical land-use on this site. Species composition and productivity are largely dependent on local conditions and management strategies.

Community 2.1
Orchardgrass - tall fescue

Under ideal circumstances these grass species will dominate. Without proper management such as rotational grazing, fertilizing and weed control, less desirable grass species and weeds will invade.

State 3
Post Agricultural Abandonment Forest State

This state results when land has been put in crops or pasture and abandoned. Pine and weedy species usually colonize. Depending on the rate and intensity of invasion, it may naturally return to an upland forest or it might need management.

Community 3.1
Pine species/invasive plants/poison ivy

Depending on the severity of past land use and the availability of seed sources locally, this site will most likely require some management to return to the reference state, including invasive plant control. If desirable to re-establish pasture, herbicide use and re-seeding will be required.

Transition A
State 1 to 2

Forest clearing, herbicide application for woody or invasive species as needed, seeding, fertilizing

Transition A
State 2 to 3

Abandonment

Restoration pathway 3
State 3 to 1

Natural succession, management (invasive plant control, tree planting in some cases)

Transition 3
State 3 to 2

Weed control, seeding, fertilization

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 (%)

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	06/18/2026
Approved by
Approval date
Composition (Indicators 10 and 12) based on	Annual Production

Indicators

Number and extent of rills:
Presence of water flow patterns:
Number and height of erosional pedestals or terracettes:
Bare ground from Ecological Site Description or other studies (rock, litter, lichen, moss, plant canopy are not bare ground):
Number of gullies and erosion associated with gullies:
Extent of wind scoured, blowouts and/or depositional areas:
Amount of litter movement (describe size and distance expected to travel):
Soil surface (top few mm) resistance to erosion (stability values are averages - most sites will show a range of values):
Soil surface structure and SOM content (include type of structure and A-horizon color and thickness):
Effect of community phase composition (relative proportion of different functional groups) and spatial distribution on infiltration and runoff:
Presence and thickness of compaction layer (usually none; describe soil profile features which may be mistaken for compaction on this site):
Functional/Structural Groups (list in order of descending dominance by above-ground annual-production or live foliar cover using symbols: >>, >, = to indicate much greater than, greater than, and equal to):

Dominant:

Sub-dominant:

Other:

Additional:
Amount of plant mortality and decadence (include which functional groups are expected to show mortality or decadence):
Average percent litter cover (%) and depth ( in):
Expected annual annual-production (this is TOTAL above-ground annual-production, not just forage annual-production):
Potential invasive (including noxious) species (native and non-native). List species which BOTH characterize degraded states and have the potential to become a dominant or co-dominant species on the ecological site if their future establishment and growth is not actively controlled by management interventions. Species that become dominant for only one to several years (e.g., short-term response to drought or wildfire) are not invasive plants. Note that unlike other indicators, we are describing what is NOT expected in the reference state for the ecological site:
Perennial plant reproductive capability:

Download reference sheet

Natural ResourcesConservation Service

Ecological site F125XY002WV

Interbedded Sedimentary Colluvium

Last updated: 9/27/2024 Accessed: 06/18/2026

Search

General information

Figure 1. Mapped extent

MLRA notes

Ecological site concept

Associated sites

Similar sites

Table 1. Dominant plant species

Natural Resources
Conservation Service

Last updated: 9/27/2024
Accessed: 06/18/2026