Natural Resources
Conservation Service
Ecological site F134XY108MS
Southern Deep Loess Backslope
Last updated: 3/24/2025
Accessed: 07/22/2026
-
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): 134X–Southern Mississippi Valley Loess
MLRA 134, Southern Mississippi Valley Loess, is in Mississippi (39 percent), Tennessee (23 percent), Louisiana (15 percent), Arkansas (11 percent), Kentucky (9 percent), Missouri (2 percent), and Illinois (1 percent). It makes up about 26,520 square miles (68,715 square kilometers). The northern part of the area includes Paducah and Murray, Kentucky; Paragould, Jonesboro, and Forrest City, Arkansas; and Memphis, Dyersburg, Bartlett, and Germantown, Tennessee. The southern part includes Yazoo City, Clinton, and Jackson, Mississippi, and Baton Rouge, Opelousas, Lafayette, and New Iberia, Louisiana. This portion is the farthest southeast part of the MLRA in Louisiana. It is in the Mississippi Valley Loess Plains Section of the EPA Ecoregions in sub-section 74c, Southern rolling Plains. The dissected plains in this MLRA have a loess mantle that is thick at the valley wall and thins rapidly as distance from the valley wall increases. Although less dissected than the Bluff Hills (74a), the region has more irregular and dissected topography than adjacent 74b to the north in Mississippi. The historic forests contained shortleaf pine, loblolly pine, and upland oaks and hickories. Pine is naturally more prevalent here than in 74a and 74b. Land cover now is mostly mixed pine-hardwood forest, pine plantations, pasture, and cropland. The eastern boundary of this region is broad, with a gradual transition to the southern Coastal Plains.
Classification relationships
Major Land Resource Area (MLRA) and Land Resource Unit (LRU) (USDA-Natural Resources Conservation Service, 2006)
EPA Level IV Ecoregion
The Natural Communities of Louisiana - (Louisiana Natural Heritage Program - Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries)Ecological site concept
This is the southern extent of the Northern Deep Loees Backslope site. The slope on this site will exceed 12%. It is found in level IV EPA Ecoregion 74a, Bluff Hills of the Mississippi Valley Loess Plains, within the Southern Mississippi Valley Loess Major Land Resource Area, south of the Big Black River in Mississippi and extending to LA. The key indicator Species for this site compared to its northern counterpart is the increase in Southern Magnolia on the site. This site is also found in the Sicily Island area of the MLRA.
Associated sites
F134XY107MS Southern Deep Loess Summit
Southern Deep Loess Summit is differentiated from this site by slopes less than 12%.
Similar sites
F134XY001TN Northern Deep Loess Backslope Mesophytic Forest
The Northern Deep Loess Backslope Mesophytic Forest is the Northern Counterpart to this site.
Table 1. Dominant plant species
Tree Not specified
Shrub Not specified
Herbaceous Not specified
Physiographic features
The Bluff Hills and the Southern Rolling Plains (EPA Level IV Ecoregions 74A and 74C, respectively) of the Southern Mississippi Valley Loess (MLRA 134) are located in southwest Mississippi and southeast Louisiana. The areas lie within the Coastal Plain Province of the Atlantic Plain. The underlying geology consists of marine deposits of sand, silt, clay, and lignite of the Pascagoula, Hattiesburg, Catahoula and Citronelle formations. The Bluff Hills, which bound the Mississippi River floodplain, are capped by loess deposits often greater than 50 feet thick (Chapman et al., 2004). The adjacent terraces of the Southern Rolling Plain are loess mantled as well.
“Loess” is the geologic term of German origin that refers to widespread deposits of homogeneous layers of friable, porous silt mixed with minor amounts of clay or fine sand (Heinrich, 2008). The loess mantle, created by well-sorted windblown silt, was deposited during the Pleistocene age. Its source was glacial sediment from glacial meltwater that was flowing down an extensive braided stream system depositing large volumes of silt over the floodplain of the Mississippi River (Heinrich, 2008). Glacial meltwater ceased flowing when southern edges of ice sheets stopped melting in fall and winter, thereby creating dry conditions on the previously flooded Mississippi River Valley. Strong seasonal winds blew across dry floodplains and eroded large quantities of silt-sized sediment, and transported it out of the Mississippi alluvial valley and deposited it on adjacent uplands and terraces (Heinrich, 2008). Over thousands of years, the silt accumulations created loess deposits that are many feet thick (Heinrich, 2008). The Bluff Hills and Southern Rolling Plains are covered mainly with 2 separate layers (and ages) of loess deposits, the older and lower Sicily Island loess and the younger Peoria loess at the soil surface. In Louisiana, the Sicily Island Hills (composed of basal strata of undifferentiated Catahoula Formation, overlain by Citronelle Formation deposits) are mantled with deep loess (25 to 30 feet thick in places) on the ridgetops and some entire side slopes.
Where blankets of loess are thicker than 6 feet, the soils formed entirely in loess. Where loess deposits are less than 6 feet thick, soils reflect the nature of the underlying parent material (McDaniel, 2001). Thick loess areas produce intensely dissected terrain with excessively steep slopes and ridge and ravine topography (McDaniel, 2001). The Bluff Hills and the Sicily Island Hills tend to have deeper, calcareous loess and steeper, much more dissected topography than the Southern Rolling Plains to the east. The loess mantle on the Southern Rolling Plains begins to thin and become more acid in the east as it transitions to the Southeastern Plains. Stream gradients in the Bluff Hills are high with narrow drainageways and floodplains, while the stream gradients become lower with broader floodplains in the Southern Rolling Plains.
This Site is located in the very steep, highly dissected Sicily Island Hills in Louisiana and the very steep, highly dissected Bluff Hills adjacent to the Mississippi River floodplains and the very western portion of the uplands of the Southern Rolling Plains in Mississippi and Louisiana. In extreme southwest Mississippi and adjacent area in Louisiana, the site is in an area locally known as the Tunica Hills. This site occurs on long, narrow, winding ridgetops and steep and very steep side slopes, upper parts of drainageways, and sharp breaks near ridgetops. Slopes mainly range from steep to very steep (12 to 90 percent), and erosion is a severe hazard. Many of these sites are in eroded to severely eroded areas with gullies cutting through unstable sideslopes and drainageways.Table 2. Representative physiographic features
Landforms (1) Ridge
(2) Bluff
Flooding frequency None Ponding frequency None Elevation 100 – 500 ft Slope 12 – 90 % Water table depth 72 – 96 in Aspect Aspect is not a significant factor Climatic features
The Southern Bluff Hills portions of MLRA 134 in Mississippi and Louisiana has a warm, humid climate, with fairly long summers and relatively short winters. The result is a long growing season and abundant plant growth. As you move northward in this region temperature trends lower and Precipitation is not as well distributed. This change in distribution does not imply that there is a rainy season and dry season, however there is a change in distribution. Water is a definitive part of this landscape, largely due to the combination of low elevation and fairly abundant rainfall in most years. Mean annual precipitation ranges from 50 to 70 inches over this region, and is fairly well distributed throughout the year. There have been very few years when less than 50 inches of precipitation has fallen. Snow is a rarity, however chances increase as you move Northward through the region. Growing seasons are long, typically from late February to late November. Hurricanes and tropical storms impact the climate of this region predominately in the southern areas, with some impact occurring nearly every year in some areas. However, devastating storms do not occur too often, and heavy rain is usually the biggest concern compared to wind damage. The following climatic data are averages from the four weather stations listed below. Temperature and precipitation may vary considerably from that listed for each month. Site specific weather data should be used for land management decisions. For site specific weather conditions, obtain data from a weather station close to the site. Information can be accessed from specific weather stations at http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/coopmap/ or http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/summary/climsmla.html.
Table 3 Representative climatic features
Frost-free period (average) 230 days Freeze-free period (average) 270 days Precipitation total (average) 60 in BarLineFigure 1. Monthly precipitation range
BarLineFigure 2. Monthly average minimum and maximum temperature
Figure 3. Annual precipitation pattern
Figure 4 Annual average temperature pattern
Climate stations used
-
(1) NATCHEZ [USC00226177], Natchez, MS
-
(2) PORT GIBSON 1 NE [USC00227132], Port Gibson, MS
-
(3) WOODVILLE 4 ESE [USC00229793], Centreville, MS
-
(4) BATON ROUGE RYAN AP [USW00013970], Baton Rouge, LA
">Influencing water features
This site is influenced mostly by surface hydrology. The Slope greater than 12% will shed rainfall and reduces the amount that will be available for plant growth. However as you near the footslopes at the lower end of this site available water may increase as sub-surface moist flows laterally within the profile.
Soil features
Soils are well drained Typic Hapludalfs (Memphis), Ultic Hapludalfs (Feliciana), Typic Eutrudepts (Natchez), and somewhat excessively drained Typic Udorthents (Fortadams). These steep to very steep soils formed in thick loess deposits in the highly dissected Bluff Hills, the Sicily Island Hills, and the western portion of the Southern Rolling Plains in the Southern Mississippi Valley Loess (MLRA 134). Slopes range from 12 to 90 percent. These deep, moderately permeable soils are found on mainly on narrow, winding ridgetops and steep to very steep, unstable side slopes. These soils have relatively few restrictions for plant growth. These soils have medium fertility, but could possibly have moderately high to high levels of exchangeable aluminum that are potentially toxic to plants. The seasonal high water table is at a depth of more than 6 feet below the surface. Erosion hazard is severe and limits land use potential. Many of these soils are in eroded to severely eroded areas with gullies cutting through unstable sideslopes and drainageways.
The soils listed in this section of the description may not be all inclusive. There may be other soils that fit this site concept, as well as in some areas where the listed soils are mapped they may not fit the site concept. Some soil map units and soil series included in this Provisional Ecological Site grouping were used as “best fit” for a particular soil-landscape catena during a specific era of soil mapping, regardless of origin of parent material or Major Land Resource Area. Therefore, these soil series may not be typical for MLRA 134, and those soil map units deserve further investigation in a joint ecological-soil survey project. When utilizing this description verify it is the correct site utilizing multiple parameters, the soils, the physiography and the location. If the site does not fit the particular location well utilize the Similar or Associated Sites listed in the Supporting Information section of this description to determine if another site may be a better fit to your location.
Table 4. Representative soil features
Surface texture (1) Silt loam
(2) Silt
Family particle size (1) Loamy
Drainage class Well drained to somewhat excessively drained Permeability class Moderate Soil depth 60 – 80 in Surface fragment cover <=3" Not specified Surface fragment cover >3" Not specified Available water capacity
(0-40in)0.14 – 0.25 in Calcium carbonate equivalent
(0-40in)0 – 30 % Electrical conductivity
(0-40in)0 – 1 mmhos/cm Sodium adsorption ratio
(0-40in)Not specified Soil reaction (1:1 water)
(0-40in)4.5 – 9 Subsurface fragment volume <=3"
(Depth not specified)Not specified Subsurface fragment volume >3"
(Depth not specified)Not specified Ecological dynamics
The pre settlement plant community of this site would have been dominated by mixed Upland hardwood species, the deep loess makes the site productive. The steep slopes of the sites would have provided moderately well to somewhat excessive drainage, however the well distributed rainfall of the region would have provided moisture for production. Within this site there will be a gradient of moisture due to the topography of the site, providing wetness variations dictating the species that are present and the composition of them within an area.
There is a potential for some trees to be uprooted by climatic events, such as strong winds and due to the slope causing soil mass movement. With these events, openings in the canopy can occur which will set back succession and allow herbaceous and woody shrub species to colonize, these low stature communities are generally short lived and the upper canopy will close as tall growing trees mature. There is generally an age gradient within a forest stand from the herbaceous openings to mature mixed hardwoods and pines.
Another historical ecological process that drove the system was fire, on this site vegetative production would have provided fuel to carry a fire, the productivity would have allowed for intense fires on this site. The slopes and ravines would have also provided and opportunity for fire intensity as well as areas unburned during the same event. A mosaic pattern of burned and unburned portions at a given time would have been normal for this site. The intensity of the fire would have burned through this site setting back succession of the herbaceous layer and at times potential into the upper stories of the plant community. Historically the region experienced a fire return interval of 2 to 4 years. Prior to European settlement naturally occurring and Native American set fires would have been a driving process in the system. Without the manmade interruptions of roads and altered land uses fires could have begun many mile from this site and carried across hundreds if not thousands of acres at a given time as well as leaving islands of unburned areas throughout the landscape.
This site has been altered by human activity and is utilized for multiple production systems such as Pasture and Tree Farms. Some steep slopes may have been historically cropped but this practice is very limited and is not recommended due to erosion limitations. For these alternative states the site productivity is generally high especially with management activities that enhance the productivity. The slope of the site can allow the site to become eroded if not protected. Within the alternative uses of the site the transitions will be very similar and require the input of resources such as installation of infrastructure needs and establishment of the desired species.State and transition model
Custom diagramStandard diagram
Figure 5. 134XY108 Southern Deep Loess Backslope PES STM
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 textState 1 submodel, plant communities
State 2 submodel, plant communities
State 3 submodel, plant communities
State 1
Historic Community - Mixed Upland HardwoodsHistorically hardwoods and pines:
Fagus grandifolia (beech), Q. shumardi (Shumard oak), Q. alba (white oak), Q. muhlenbergii (chinkapin oak), Q. michauxii (cow oak), Q. nigra (water oak), Liriodendron tulipifera (yellow poplar), Magnolia grandiflora (southern magnolia), M. acuminata (cucumber magnolia), M. pyramidata (pyramid magnolia), Ulmus americana (American elm), U. rubra (slippery elm), Tillia caroliniana (Carolina basswood), Morus rubra (red mulberry), Acer barbatum (Florida sugar maple), Carya glabra (pignut hickory), C. cordiformis (bitternut hickory), Fraxinus americana (white ash), Celtis laevigata (hackberry), Platanus occidentalis (sycamore)Community 1.1
Mixed upland HardwoodsFagus grandifolia (beech), Q. shumardi (Shumard oak), Q. alba (white oak), Q. muhlenbergii (chinkapin oak), Q. michauxii (cow oak), Q. nigra (water oak), Liriodendron tulipifera (yellow poplar), Magnolia grandiflora (southern magnolia), M. acuminata (cucumber magnolia), M. pyramidata (pyramid magnolia), Ulmus americana (American elm), U. rubra (slippery elm), Tillia caroliniana (Carolina basswood), Morus rubra (red mulberry), Acer barbatum (Florida sugar maple), Carya glabra (pignut hickory), C. cordiformis (bitternut hickory), Fraxinus americana (white ash), Celtis laevigata (hackberry), Platanus occidentalis (sycamore)
State 2
Tree FarmTree Farm
Community 2.1
Tree FarmHardwood or Pine Plantation:
This phase is characterized by few or a monoculture of Hardwood or Pine species planted or allowed to regenerate from seed trees managed for wood production.
This Site fits into multiple Woodland Management and Productivity Groups 11 or 12 in MS.
The first element in ordination is a number that denotes potential productivity in terms of cubic meters of wood per hectare per year for an indicator tree species. The larger the number, the greater the potential productivity. (1 means 1 cubic meter per hectare per year (14.3 cu.ft./ac) 10 means 10 cubic meters per hectare per year (143 cu.ft./ac)) The second element or subclass is indicated by a capital letter, which indicates certain soil or physiographic characteristics that contribute to important hazards or limitations in management.
OR this Site fits into Woodland Suitability Group 1o7 in LA, depending on the soil Mapunit. The first part of the symbol indicates potential productivity of the soils for important trees, very high (1). The second part, a letter, indicates the major kind of soil limitation, no serious management problems (o). The third part of the symbol, a numeral, indicates the kind of trees for which the soils are best suited and the severity of the hazard or limitation. The numeral 7 indicate slight limitations and suitability for both needle leaf and broadleaf trees.
WSG 1o7 Well drained loam soils suitable for either pines or southern hardwoods with very high potential productivity; no serious management problems. Potential is high for management of turkey and quail, and moderately high for squirrels and deer.
These groups would generally describe this site as highly productive with moderate to slight limitations for the production of broadleaf and some needle leaf species. This site is defined by it's slopes greater than 12% and with the possibility to reach 90% which is a management limitation of the site and should be considered when deciding the appropriate forest production to manage for.State 3
PasturelandManaged Pasture - PHG 8A or 8b.
Community 3.1
PasturePasture or Grassland:
This phase is characterized by a monoculture of or mixture of Forage species planted or allowed to establish from naturalized species, managed for forage production or as herbaceous ground cover.
This Site fits into multiple Pasture Suitability Groups: 8b in MS or 8A in LA.
• 8b - Upland, deep, medium textured soils, well drained
• 8 - Upland, deep, medium-textured soil
• A – soils having few limitations for the growth of the commonly grown plants except for slope.
From these bullet descriptions of the Groups and the site description, this site would generally be described as a Deep, Well drained, Medium textured soils on Uplands. It has limiting factors including slope.
All soils need nitrogen fertilization for production when grasses are grown alone. To prevent extreme acidity in the subsoil when high rates of acidifying nitrogen is used, the surface soil should not be allowed to become more acid than 5.0 pH and lime should be applied at more frequent intervals. The potential for steep slopes on this site will limit its usefulness for forage production, especially where mechanical harvesting or planting is planned. Site specific conditions should be considered closely prior to planning management activities.Figure 6. Annual production by plant type (representative values) or group (midpoint values)
Table 5. Annual production by plant type
Plant type Low
(lb/acre)Representative value
(lb/acre)High
(lb/acre)Grass/Grasslike 1900 3600 5200 Total 1900 3600 5200 Additional community tables
Table 6. Community 1.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 7. Community 2.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 8. Community 3.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Grass/Grasslike1 Warm Season Grasses 1900–5200 Bermudagrass CYDA Cynodon dactylon 1900–5200 – Interpretations
Supporting information
Other references
Autin, W. J., Burns, S. F., Miller, B. J., Saucier, R. T., & Snead, J. I. (1991). Quaternary geology of the lower Mississippi Valley. The Geology of North America, 2, 547-582.
Chapman, S.S, Griffith, G.E., Omernik, J.M., Comstock, J.A., Beiser, M.C., and Johnson, D., 2004, Ecoregions of Mississippi, (color poster with map, descriptive text, summary tables, and photographs): Reston, Virginia, U.S. Geological Survey (map scale 1:1,000,000).
Cowardin, L. M., Carter, V., Golet, F. C., & LaRoe, E. T. (1979). Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States. US Fish and Wildlife Service FWS/OBS, 79(31), 131.
Daigle, J.J., Griffith, G.E., Omernik, J.M., Faulkner, P.L., McCulloh, R.P., Handley, L.R., Smith, L.M., and Chapman, S.S., 2006, Ecoregions of Louisiana (color poster with map, descriptive text, summary tables, and photographs): Reston, Virginia, U.S. Geological Survey (map scale 1:1,000,000).
Emerson, F. V. (1918). Loess-depositing winds in Louisiana. The Journal of Geology, 26(6), 532-541.
Ezell, A. W., & Hodges, J. D. (1995). Bottomland hardwood management: Species Site Relationships. MSU Extension Service Publication 2004.
Guyette, R. P., Stambaugh, M. C., Dey, D. C., & Muzika, R. M. (2012). Predicting fire frequency with chemistry and climate. Ecosystems, 15(2), 322-335.
Heinrich, P. V., (2008)_Loess Map of LA, Louisiana Geological Survey
Kochian, L. V., Pineros, M. A., & Hoekenga, O. A. (2005). The physiology, genetics and molecular biology of plant aluminum resistance and toxicity. In Root Physiology: From Gene to Function (pp. 175-195). Springer Netherlands.
Miller, B. J., Lewis, G. C., Alford, J. J. & Day, W. J. (1984) Loesses in Louisiana and at Vicksburg, Mississippi. Guidebook for Friends of the Pleistocene Field Trip.
Miller, B. J., Day, W. J., & Schumacher, B. A. (1986). Loesses and loess-derived soils in the Lower Mississippi Valley. Guidebook for soils-geomorphology tour.
Pettry, D. E., & Switzer, R. E. (1998). Sodium soils in Mississippi.
Rutledge, E.M., M.J. Guccione, H.W. Markewich, D.A. Wysocki, and L.B. Ward. 1996. Loess stratigraphy of the Lower Mississippi Valley. Engineering Geology 45: 167-183.
Saucier, Roger T. 1994. Geomorphology and Quaternary Geologic History of the Lower Mississippi Valley, Volume I & II. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Vicksburg, MS.
Schumacher, B. A., Miller, B. J., & Day, W. J. (1987). A chronotoposequence of soils developed in loess in central Louisiana. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 51(4), 1005-1010.
Theriot, R. F. (1992). Flood tolerance of plant species in bottomland forests of the southeastern United States.
United States Salinity Laboratory Staff, USA, USDA (1954), Diagnosis and improvement of saline and alkali soils, USDA Agriculture Handbook 60,1954, 160 pp.Contributors
D Charles Stemmans II
Rachel Stout EvansApproval
Matthew Duvall, 3/24/2025
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 07/22/2026 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