Natural Resources
Conservation Service
Ecological site R085AY181TX
Loamy Bottomland 30-38" PZ
Last updated: 9/21/2023
Accessed: 11/21/2024
General 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.
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): 085A–Grand Prairie
The Grand Prairie MLRA is characterized by predominately loam and clay loam soils underlain by limestone and shale. Topography transitions from steeper ridges and summits of the Lampasas Cut Plain on the southern end to the more rolling hills of the Fort Worth Prairie to the north. The Arbuckle Mountain area in Oklahoma is also within this MLRA.
Classification relationships
This ecological site is correlated to soil components at the Major Land Resource Area (MLRA) level which is further described in USDA Ag Handbook 296.
Ecological site concept
These sites occur over deep loamy soils on floodplains. The reference vegetation consists of native tallgrasses and forbs with very few shrubs and bottomland hardwood trees. In the absence of fire or other brush management, woody species may increase and dominate the site. Many of these areas are still in crop production or may have been planted back to an introduced pasture species. This is one of the most productive sites in the area.
Associated sites
| R085AY179TX |
Clayey Slope 30-38 Usually located upland from the Loamy Bottomland site. |
|---|
Similar sites
| R085AY178TX |
Clayey Bottomland 30-38" PZ Similar landform with fine textured soils. |
|---|---|
| R085BY050OK |
Loamy Bottomland 38-42 PZ Similar site in Arbuckle Uplift in Oklahoma |
Table 1. Dominant plant species
| Tree |
(1) Carya illinoinensis |
|---|---|
| Shrub |
Not specified |
| Herbaceous |
(1) Andropogon gerardii |
Physiographic features
This site occurs on nearly level to very gently sloping soils on flood plains. Slope ranges from 0 to 2 percent.
Table 2. Representative physiographic features
| Landforms |
(1)
Alluvial plain
> Flood plain
|
|---|---|
| Runoff class | Negligible to low |
| Flooding duration | Very brief (4 to 48 hours) to brief (2 to 7 days) |
| Flooding frequency | Rare to frequent |
| Elevation | 152 – 579 m |
| Slope | 0 – 2% |
| Water table depth | 102 cm |
| Aspect | Aspect is not a significant factor |
Climatic features
The climate is subhumid subtropical and is characterized by hot summers and relatively mild winters. Tropical maritime air controls the climate during spring, summer and fall. In winter and early spring, frequent surges of Polar Canadian air cause sudden drops in temperatures and add considerable variety to the daily weather. The average first frost should occur around November 5 and the last freeze of the season should occur around March 19.
The average relative humidity in mid-afternoon is about 60 percent. Humidity is higher at night, and the average at dawn is about 80 percent. The sun shines 75 percent of the time possible during the summer and 50 percent in winter. The prevailing wind direction is from the south and highest windspeeds occur during the spring months.
Approximately two-thirds of annual rainfall occurs during the April to September period. Rainfall during this period generally falls during thunderstorms, and fairly large amounts of rain may fall in a short time. The driest months are usually July and August.
Table 3. Representative climatic features
| Frost-free period (characteristic range) | 194-208 days |
|---|---|
| Freeze-free period (characteristic range) | 216-243 days |
| Precipitation total (characteristic range) | 813-965 mm |
| Frost-free period (actual range) | 190-209 days |
| Freeze-free period (actual range) | 209-245 days |
| Precipitation total (actual range) | 787-991 mm |
| Frost-free period (average) | 201 days |
| Freeze-free period (average) | 230 days |
| Precipitation total (average) | 889 mm |
Figure 2. Monthly precipitation range
Figure 3. Monthly minimum temperature range
Figure 4. Monthly maximum temperature range
Figure 5. Monthly average minimum and maximum temperature
Figure 6. Annual precipitation pattern
Figure 7. Annual average temperature pattern
Climate stations used
-
(1) BENBROOK DAM [USC00410691], Fort Worth, TX
-
(2) CLEBURNE [USC00411800], Cleburne, TX
-
(3) WHITNEY DAM [USC00419715], Clifton, TX
-
(4) DENTON MUNI AP [USW00003991], Ponder, TX
-
(5) DECATUR [USC00412334], Decatur, TX
-
(6) EVANT 1SSW [USC00413005], Evant, TX
-
(7) BROWNWOOD 2ENE [USC00411138], Early, TX
-
(8) LAMPASAS [USC00415018], Lampasas, TX
Influencing water features
These sites occur on soils formed in alluvial sediments from flood events. Flooding frequencies may vary but the impacts of flooding can have significant effects on the plant community. These site receive water from overland flow off of adjacent sites uphill.
Wetland description
Site specific evaluations are required to determine the presence of wetlands.
Figure 8.
Soil features
Representative soil components for this ecological site include: Boerne, Bosque, Frio, Lamkin, and Sunev
The site is characterized by very deep loamy calcareous soils. The soils are very deep, well drained, moderately slowly permeable soils that formed in calcareous loamy and clayey alluvium.
Table 4. Representative soil features
| Parent material |
(1)
Alluvium
–
mudstone
(2) Alluvium – limestone |
|---|---|
| Surface texture |
(1) Loam (2) Clay loam (3) Silty clay loam |
| Drainage class | Well drained |
| Permeability class | Moderately slow to moderate |
| Soil depth | 183 cm |
| Surface fragment cover <=3" | 0 – 2% |
| Surface fragment cover >3" | 0 – 2% |
| Available water capacity (0-101.6cm) |
20.32 – 27.94 cm |
| Calcium carbonate equivalent (0-101.6cm) |
2 – 40% |
| Electrical conductivity (0-101.6cm) |
0 – 2 mmhos/cm |
| Sodium adsorption ratio (0-101.6cm) |
0 – 2 |
| Soil reaction (1:1 water) (0-101.6cm) |
7.4 – 8.4 |
| Subsurface fragment volume <=3" (Depth not specified) |
0 – 15% |
| Subsurface fragment volume >3" (Depth not specified) |
0 – 2% |
Ecological dynamics
The reference plant community for the Loamy Bottomland site is a tallgrass prairie. The grasses are primarily little bluestem (Schizachyrium scoparium), Indiangrass (Sorghastrum nutans), and big bluestem (Andropogon gerardii). Little bluestem, big bluestem, and Indiangrass are the most commonly occurring grass species for this site. Switchgrass (Panicum virgatum), eastern gamagrass (Tripsacum dactyloides) and sideoats grama (Bouteloua curtipendula) occur as well. Few shrubs and trees are present in this community. The woody component consists of live oak (Quercus virginiana), Pecan (Carya illinoinensis), elm species (Ulmus spp.), plum species (Prunus spp.), hackberry (Celtis occidentalis) and bumelia (Sideroxylon lanuginosum). Most woody plants are confined to areas along drainages. The grasses are palatable and nutritious and the site can provide year round grazing.
To a large extent, the way the site changes depends on the location relative to the distance from the West Cross Timbers Major Land Resource Area (MLRA 84C). Sites generally tend to change in the absence of fire toward a woodland community (plants native to the site increase in density) while sites with abusive grazing practices tends to change to a mesquite dominated site. Woody plants have increased over the past 100 to 150 years on many of the loamy bottomland sites. Where there is a seed source close by, Ashe juniper (Juniperus ashei), eastern redcedar (Juniperus virginiana) and mesquite (Prosopis glandulosa) will readily invade the site. The juniper first occurs under fences, trees and other places where songbirds rest. In this way, fences have aided in the spread of juniper. Moreover, the juniper seedling survival is greatest when a good cover of grass exists and there is no fire.
Grazing management with cattle alone probably has minimal effect on the proliferation of woody plants, but a good cover of perennial grasses is likely to minimize the seed-to-soil contact to establish. Mesquite seedpods are relished by livestock and the seeds pass through the digestive tract intact with enhanced germination had they just fallen off the tree onto the ground. In this manner, livestock help distribute the seeds. This places the seed pods in an ideal medium for germination and establishment when moisture conditions are right. Mesquite tends to be more of a problem than juniper on this site.
Fire plays a role in the ecology of the site which is true for most of the grasslands. The main effect of fire on this site is to hold woody shrubs and cactus (Opuntia spp.) in check. The grass species such as little bluestem, big bluestem and Indiangrass are considered to be fire enhanced.
Pre-settlement fires that suppressed woody plants were severe because of the amount of grass fuel being available. Fires, in conjunction with grazing, usually created more diversity on this site for a year or two post-burn. Some forbs also need spring moisture which is perhaps a major triggering factor. Prescribed fire is an important tool to promote plant diversity. Fire did not produce much mortality in older and resprouting woody plants. After brush has been controlled with herbicides or mechanically, fire can be used effectively to suppress regrowth. Small juniper is easily killed by fire. Fuel loads are the most limiting factor for the effective use of fire on this site. Once woody plants become mature (larger) or develop into dense stands, suppression with fire is limited. Woody plant suppression using safe approved herbicides or mechanical treatment is generally more practical, with fire playing a role as follow-up.
With abusive grazing practices, the vigorous Indiangrass and big bluestem will become lower in vigor while little bluestem will increase. Then secondary successional species, such as silver bluestem (Bothriochola laguroides), will begin to increase along with an increase of woody plants if fire or brush management is not used. Little bluestem is a tough, resistant species tolerant of some heavy grazing. But at some point, a threshold is crossed and the ground cover is opened up resulting in bare places where weedy species can establish. Western ragweed (Ambrosia psilostachya), crotons (Croton setigerus), and cool-season annuals will quickly invade if the principal species are in a weakened condition. Prescribed fire is a tool to control the spread of woody plants. Selective individual removal of mesquite and/or juniper is easy and economical when brush plants initially appear on the site. The increase of brush can be fairly rapid and the plants per acre will soon become too numerous for individual control to be feasible. Prescribed grazing with a reasonable stocking rate can sustain the grass species composition and production at the reference community level. The site can be abused to the point that the perennial warm-season grasses thin out and lower successional grasses and annual forbs begin to dominate. This process of degradation usually takes many years and is further exacerbated by summer drought and above average winter moisture.
Climate is a major factor influencing vegetation on the site. Long-term droughts that occur only three to four times in a century can effect some change in plant communities, when coupled with abusive grazing. Short-term droughts are common and usually do not have a lasting effect in changing stable plant communities, although annual production will be affected. The effects of seasonal moisture and short-term dry spells become more pronounced after the site crosses thresholds to an alternative state. Plant communities that consist of warm-season perennial grasses, such as little bluestem and associated species of the reference community, are able to persist and withstand climatic extremes with only minor shifts in the overall plant community. But, when brush canopy shades the ground, cool-season species are favored. Once a state of brush and cool-season plants is reached, recovery to a good perennial warm-season grass cover is unlikely without major input of brush management and reseeding.
In summary, the change in states of vegetation depend on the collective influence of grazing management, prescribed fire and brush management applied over many years, as well as the rate of invasion and establishment of woody species.
State and Transitional Pathways (S&T): Narrative
The following diagram suggests some pathways that the vegetation on this site might take in response to the various conservation treatments or natural stimuli that may occur over time. There may be other states which may occur that are not shown on this diagram. This S & T Model was developed to show significant changes in the plant community that can occur due to management and natural factors; or be changed by implementing certain practices. The plant communities described in the S & T Model are commonly observed on this site in the MLRA 85. Before making plans for plant community manipulation for specific purposes, consult local professionals.
As vegetative changes occur, certain thresholds can be crossed. Change may occur slowly, or fairly quickly. Once a certain point is reached during the transition of one community to another, a return to the first state may not be possible without the input of some form of energy. This required input often means intervention with practices that are not part of the natural processes. An example might be the application of herbicide to control some woody species in order to reduce the density and canopy cover and to encourage more grass and forbs growth. Merely adjusting grazing practices would not accomplish any significant change in a plant community once certain thresholds are crossed. The amount of energy required to effect change in community would depend on the present vegetative state and the plant community desired by the landowner.
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 submodel, plant communities
State 2 submodel, plant communities
State 3 submodel, plant communities
State 4 submodel, plant communities
State 1
Tallgrass Bottomland State - Reference
Dominant plant species
-
pecan (Carya illinoinensis), tree
-
big bluestem (Andropogon gerardii), grass
-
switchgrass (Panicum virgatum), grass
Community 1.1
Tallgrass Bottomland Community
Figure 9. 1.1 Tallgrass Bottomland Community
The interpretive plant community for this site is the Reference Plant Community. This community is a Tallgrass Bottomland Community (1.1). The community is dominated by warm-season perennial tallgrasses such as little bluestem, big bluestem, switchgrass, eastern gamagrass and Indiangrass. Other major perennial grass species such as sideoats grama and silver bluestem are well dispersed through the site. Perennial forbs such as sunflowers (Helianthus spp.), prairie clovers (Dalea spp.), bundleflowers (Desmanthus spp.), and daleas (Dalea spp.) are well represented throughout the community. This plant community evolved with a short duration of heavy use by large herbivores followed by long rest periods due to herd migration, usually following a fire. This state can go directly to the Woodland Community in the absence of fire or brush management to assist in suppressing the brush species and still have the tallgrass component present in the community. With heavy grazing pressure and the removal of fire, this community will change into a Tallgrass with woody encroachment community (1.2) or Woodland Community (2.1). The changes within the grassland communities can change fairly rapid while the communities having an increase of woody plants are somewhat slower.
Figure 10. Annual production by plant type (representative values) or group (midpoint values)
Table 5. Annual production by plant type
| Plant type | Low (kg/hectare) |
Representative value (kg/hectare) |
High (kg/hectare) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Grass/Grasslike | 3363 | 5884 | 8406 |
| Shrub/Vine | 448 | 785 | 1121 |
| Tree | 448 | 785 | 1121 |
| Forb | 224 | 392 | 560 |
| Total | 4483 | 7846 | 11208 |
Figure 11. Plant community growth curve (percent production by month). TX6011, Warm-season perennial tallgrass prairie. The community is dominated by warm-season perennial tallgrasses with few shrubs, trees and forbs..
| Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| J | F | M | A | M | J | J | A | S | O | N | D |
| 1 | 2 | 2 | 18 | 23 | 17 | 6 | 4 | 16 | 6 | 3 | 2 |
Community 1.2
Tallgrass with Woody Encroachment Community
Figure 12. 1.2 Tallgrass with Woody Encroachment Community
This plant community occurs with heavy yearlong grazing by large herbivores and without the application of fire or brush management practices. The tallgrasses will start to disappear from the plant community. Invader brush species such as mesquite, juniper, and prickly pear cactus becomes established. Cedar elm (Ulmus crassifolia), bumelia, and hackberry also start to increase. Texas wintergrass (Nassella leucotricha) increases as brush canopy increases. It is more shade tolerant since most of growth occurs during the cool season when brush has lost its leaves. The plant community consists of 25 to 50% percent canopy of woody plants. Continuous heavy grazing by domestic livestock has accelerated the shift towards the Woodland Community (2.1). The tallgrass bottomland with woody encroachment (1.2) can revert back to the tallgrass bottomland with conservation practices such as prescribed burning and/or prescribed grazing. Without prescribed burning and/or prescribed grazing, this plant community would continue to shift toward the Woodland Community (2.1).
Figure 13. Annual production by plant type (representative values) or group (midpoint values)
Table 6. Annual production by plant type
| Plant type | Low (kg/hectare) |
Representative value (kg/hectare) |
High (kg/hectare) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Grass/Grasslike | 1513 | 2645 | 3783 |
| Shrub/Vine | 673 | 1177 | 1681 |
| Tree | 673 | 1177 | 1681 |
| Forb | 504 | 885 | 1261 |
| Total | 3363 | 5884 | 8406 |
Figure 14. Plant community growth curve (percent production by month). TX6016, Tallgrass Prairie with Woody Encroachment. Tallgrasses with increasing amounts of woody species..
| Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| J | F | M | A | M | J | J | A | S | O | N | D |
| 1 | 2 | 2 | 18 | 23 | 17 | 6 | 4 | 16 | 6 | 3 | 2 |
Pathway 1.1A
Community 1.1 to 1.2
With heavy continuous grazing, no brush management, and no fires, the Tallgrass Bottomland Community would shift to the Tallgrass with Woody Encroachment Community.
Pathway 1.2A
Community 1.2 to 1.1
With the application of conservation practices such as Prescribed Grazing, Brush Management, and Prescribed Burning, the Tallgrass with Woody Encroachment Community can revert back to the Tallgrass Bottomland Community.
Conservation practices
| Brush Management | |
|---|---|
| Prescribed Burning | |
| Prescribed Grazing |
State 2
Woodland State
Dominant plant species
-
pecan (Carya illinoinensis), tree
-
elm (Ulmus), tree
-
sugarberry (Celtis laevigata), tree
-
wildrye (Elymus), grass
-
Texas wintergrass (Nassella leucotricha), grass
Community 2.1
Dense Woodland Community
Figure 15. 2.1 Dense Woodland Community
The Dense Woodland Community (2.1) consists of mixed grasses with greater than 50 percent canopy of woody plants. As this community ages, the woody canopy continues to increase. Texas wintergrass, threeawns (Aristida spp) and annuals continue to increase. At this point, shade is a driving factor in the understory plant community. Warm-season perennial tallgrasses such as Indiangrass and switchgrass have all but disappeared. Continuous heavy grazing by domestic livestock has accelerated the shift. The shift to this state has occurred due to the absence of fire or other means of keeping the canopy open. This state can be reverted back to near historic condition by some means of brush suppression coupled with seeding and good grazing management. Without this treatment, the site will continue to shift toward more dense stands of brush.
Figure 16. Annual production by plant type (representative values) or group (midpoint values)
Table 7. Annual production by plant type
| Plant type | Low (kg/hectare) |
Representative value (kg/hectare) |
High (kg/hectare) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Forb | 841 | 1328 | 1821 |
| Grass/Grasslike | 841 | 1328 | 1821 |
| Shrub/Vine | 841 | 1328 | 1821 |
| Tree | 841 | 1328 | 1821 |
| Total | 3364 | 5312 | 7284 |
Figure 17. Plant community growth curve (percent production by month). TX6014, Mesquite/Juniper/Brushland Community. Consist of mixed grasses with greater than 50 percent canopy of woody plants..
| Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| J | F | M | A | M | J | J | A | S | O | N | D |
| 1 | 3 | 8 | 20 | 25 | 19 | 5 | 3 | 10 | 4 | 1 | 1 |
Community 3.1
Cropland Community
Extensive conversion of the Loamy Bottomland ecological site to cropland (primarily cotton and corn) occurred from the middle 1800s to the early 1900s. Some remains in cropland today – typically small grain production for stocker-cattle grazing. While restoration of this site to a semblance of the tallgrass prairie is possible with range planting, prescribed grazing, and prescribed burning - complete restoration of the reference community in a reasonable time is very unlikely due to deterioration of the soil structure and organisms. If cropping is abandoned, this land is usually planted to introduced grasses and forbs and managed as pastureland.
Figure 18. Annual production by plant type (representative values) or group (midpoint values)
Figure 19. Plant community growth curve (percent production by month). TX6102, Cool-Season Annual Grasses & Legumes. Oats, Rye, Wheat, Ryegrass, Clover and Vetch planted..
| Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| J | F | M | A | M | J | J | A | S | O | N | D |
| 11 | 13 | 19 | 21 | 19 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 9 |
Community 3.2
Pastureland Community
This community is the result of mechanical brush control and reseeding using one or more introduced grass species. Introduced species such as kleingrass (Panicum coloratum) or one of the old world bluestems (Bothriochloa ischaemum var.) such as WW Spar or WB Dahl may be a part of the seed mixture. Due to the lack of diversity of plant species and presence of introduced species it will take a long time if ever for this state to again reach the reference state.
Figure 20. Annual production by plant type (representative values) or group (midpoint values)
Table 8. Annual production by plant type
| Plant type | Low (kg/hectare) |
Representative value (kg/hectare) |
High (kg/hectare) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Grass/Grasslike | 3587 | 5828 | 8406 |
| Forb | 224 | 392 | 560 |
| Total | 3811 | 6220 | 8966 |
Figure 21. Plant community growth curve (percent production by month). TX6015, Open Seeded Grassland Community. This state is usually the result of mechanical brush control and reseeding using one or more native grass species..
| Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| J | F | M | A | M | J | J | A | S | O | N | D |
| 1 | 2 | 2 | 18 | 23 | 17 | 6 | 4 | 16 | 6 | 3 | 2 |
Community 3.3
Native Seeded Grassland Community
Figure 22. 3.3 Native Seeded Grassland Community
This state is usually the result of mechanical brush control and reseeding using one or more native grass species. An introduced species such as kleingrass (Panicum coloratum) or one of the old world bluestems, (Bothriochloa ischaemum var.) such as WW Spar or WB Dahl, may be a part of the seed mixture. This community can also be created from cropland planted to native grass species. Due to the lack of diversity of plant species, soil degradation, and presence of introduced species, it will take a long time if ever for this state to again reach the reference state.
Figure 23. Annual production by plant type (representative values) or group (midpoint values)
Table 9. Annual production by plant type
| Plant type | Low (kg/hectare) |
Representative value (kg/hectare) |
High (kg/hectare) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Grass/Grasslike | 3587 | 6277 | 8967 |
| Shrub/Vine | 448 | 785 | 1121 |
| Tree | 224 | 392 | 560 |
| Forb | 224 | 392 | 560 |
| Total | 4483 | 7846 | 11208 |
Figure 24. Plant community growth curve (percent production by month). TX6015, Open Seeded Grassland Community. This state is usually the result of mechanical brush control and reseeding using one or more native grass species..
| Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| J | F | M | A | M | J | J | A | S | O | N | D |
| 1 | 2 | 2 | 18 | 23 | 17 | 6 | 4 | 16 | 6 | 3 | 2 |
Pathway 3.1A
Community 3.1 to 3.2
With Pasture Planting, the Cropland Community can be converted into the Pastureland Community (monocultures).
Conservation practices
| Forage and Biomass Planting |
|---|
Pathway 3.1B
Community 3.1 to 3.3
With Prescribed Grazing, Range Planting, and Prescribed Burning, the Cropland Community can be converted into the Native Seeding Community.
Conservation practices
| Prescribed Burning | |
|---|---|
| Prescribed Grazing | |
| Range Planting |
Pathway 3.2A
Community 3.2 to 3.1
With Crop Cultivation, the Pastureland Community can be converted into a Cropland Community.
Pathway 3.2B
Community 3.2 to 3.3
With Prescribed Grazing, Prescribed Burning, and Range Planting, the Pastureland Community can be converted into the Native Seeding Community.
Conservation practices
| Prescribed Burning | |
|---|---|
| Prescribed Grazing | |
| Range Planting |
Pathway 3.3A
Community 3.3 to 3.1
With Brush Management and Crop Cultivation, the Native Seeding Community can be converted into a Cropland Community.
Conservation practices
| Brush Management |
|---|
Pathway 3.3B
Community 3.3 to 3.2
With Prescribed Grazing and Pasture Planting, the Native Seeding Community can be converted into the Pastureland Community.
Conservation practices
| Forage and Biomass Planting | |
|---|---|
| Prescribed Grazing |
State 4
Mesquite State
Dominant plant species
-
honey mesquite (Prosopis glandulosa), tree
-
Texas wintergrass (Nassella leucotricha), grass
Community 4.1
Mesquite Dominant Community
Figure 25. 4.1 Mesquite Dominant Community
This plant community is a mesquite dominated shrubland community (greater than 25% woody canopy) (4.1). Other species may be present in small amounts include cedar elm, hackberry, and liveoak. With the dominance of mesquite along with continuous heavy grazing, prickly pear cactus may become a major plant in the community. The herbaceous understory is almost nonexistent. Shade tolerant species such as Texas wintergrass tends to be the dominant grass at the sites where mesquite is the dominant woody plant. Continuous grazing by domestic livestock has accelerated the shift. This community can also develop from abandoned cropland. The tallgrass prairie can be restored by mechanical or chemical treatment of the mesquite. Integrated treatments over time of chemical, mechanical, seeding, and prescribed burning will be needed to restore this site to close to the reference community.
Figure 26. Annual production by plant type (representative values) or group (midpoint values)
Table 10. Annual production by plant type
| Plant type | Low (kg/hectare) |
Representative value (kg/hectare) |
High (kg/hectare) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tree | 1681 | 2802 | 3923 |
| Grass/Grasslike | 841 | 1401 | 1961 |
| Forb | 504 | 841 | 1177 |
| Shrub/Vine | 336 | 560 | 785 |
| Total | 3362 | 5604 | 7846 |
Figure 27. Plant community growth curve (percent production by month). TX6014, Mesquite/Juniper/Brushland Community. Consist of mixed grasses with greater than 50 percent canopy of woody plants..
| Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| J | F | M | A | M | J | J | A | S | O | N | D |
| 1 | 3 | 8 | 20 | 25 | 19 | 5 | 3 | 10 | 4 | 1 | 1 |
Transition T1A
State 1 to 2
With heavy continuous grazing, idle and no fires, the Tallgrass Bottomland State shifts to the Woodland State.
Transition T1B
State 1 to 3
With Brush Management, Crop Cultivation, Range Planting, Pasture Planting, and Prescribed Grazing conservation practices, the Tallgrass Bottomland State shifts to the Seeded State.
Restoration pathway R2A
State 2 to 1
With the implementation of Prescribed Grazing, Brush Management, Range Planting, Prescribed Burning conservation practices, the Woodland State can revert back to the Tallgrass Bottomland State.
Conservation practices
| Brush Management | |
|---|---|
| Prescribed Burning | |
| Prescribed Grazing | |
| Range Planting |
Transition T2A
State 2 to 3
With Brush Management, Crop Cultivation, Range Planting, Pasture Planting, and Prescribed Grazing conservation practices, the Dense Woodland State shifts to the Seeded State.
Restoration pathway R3B
State 3 to 2
With heavy continuous grazing, no brush management, and land being idled, the Seeded State shifts to the Woodland State.
Transition T3A
State 3 to 4
With heavy continuous grazing, no brush management, and idled land, the Seeded State shifts to the Mesquite State.
Restoration pathway R4B
State 4 to 2
With heavy continuous grazing, no brush management, and no fires, the Mesquite State shifts to the Woodland State.
Restoration pathway R4A
State 4 to 3
With Prescribed Grazing, Brush Management, Pasture Planting, Crop Cultivation, Range Planting, and Prescribed Burning conservation practices, the Mesquite State could revert to the Seeded State.
Conservation practices
| Brush Management | |
|---|---|
| Prescribed Burning | |
| Forage and Biomass Planting | |
| Prescribed Grazing | |
| Range Planting |
Additional community tables
Table 11. Community 1.1 plant community composition
| Group | Common name | Symbol | Scientific name | Annual production (kg/hectare) | Foliar cover (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Grass/Grasslike
|
||||||
| 1 | Tallgrass | 897–2242 | ||||
| little bluestem | SCSC | Schizachyrium scoparium | 897–2242 | – | ||
| 2 | Tallgrasses | 1793–4483 | ||||
| big bluestem | ANGE | Andropogon gerardii | 448–4483 | – | ||
| switchgrass | PAVI2 | Panicum virgatum | 448–4483 | – | ||
| Indiangrass | SONU2 | Sorghastrum nutans | 448–4483 | – | ||
| eastern gamagrass | TRDA3 | Tripsacum dactyloides | 448–4483 | – | ||
| 3 | Midgrasses | 448–1121 | ||||
| sideoats grama | BOCU | Bouteloua curtipendula | 67–1121 | – | ||
| silver beardgrass | BOLAT | Bothriochloa laguroides ssp. torreyana | 67–1121 | – | ||
| Canada wildrye | ELCA4 | Elymus canadensis | 67–1121 | – | ||
| Virginia wildrye | ELVI3 | Elymus virginicus | 67–1121 | – | ||
| Texas cupgrass | ERSE5 | Eriochloa sericea | 67–1121 | – | ||
| Texas wintergrass | NALE3 | Nassella leucotricha | 67–1121 | – | ||
| 4 | Mid/Shortgrasses | 224–560 | ||||
| purple threeawn | ARPUP9 | Aristida purpurea var. perplexa | 0–560 | – | ||
| Wright's threeawn | ARPUW | Aristida purpurea var. wrightii | 0–560 | – | ||
| buffalograss | BODA2 | Bouteloua dactyloides | 0–560 | – | ||
| hairy grama | BOHI2 | Bouteloua hirsuta | 0–560 | – | ||
| tall grama | BOHIP | Bouteloua hirsuta var. pectinata | 0–560 | – | ||
| fall witchgrass | DICO6 | Digitaria cognata | 0–560 | – | ||
| plains lovegrass | ERIN | Eragrostis intermedia | 0–560 | – | ||
| seep muhly | MURE2 | Muhlenbergia reverchonii | 0–560 | – | ||
| vine mesquite | PAOB | Panicum obtusum | 0–560 | – | ||
| Texas bluegrass | POAR | Poa arachnifera | 0–560 | – | ||
| Drummond's dropseed | SPCOD3 | Sporobolus compositus var. drummondii | 0–560 | – | ||
| white tridens | TRAL2 | Tridens albescens | 0–560 | – | ||
| slim tridens | TRMU | Tridens muticus | 0–560 | – | ||
|
Forb
|
||||||
| 5 | Forbs | 224–560 | ||||
| Texas broomweed | AMAM3 | Amphiachyris amoena | 0–560 | – | ||
| Cuman ragweed | AMPS | Ambrosia psilostachya | 0–560 | – | ||
| white sagebrush | ARLUM2 | Artemisia ludoviciana ssp. mexicana | 0–560 | – | ||
| crested pricklypoppy | ARPO2 | Argemone polyanthemos | 0–560 | – | ||
| American star-thistle | CEAM2 | Centaurea americana | 0–560 | – | ||
| whitemouth dayflower | COER | Commelina erecta | 0–560 | – | ||
| croton | CROTO | Croton | 0–560 | – | ||
| prairie clover | DALEA | Dalea | 0–560 | – | ||
| purple prairie clover | DAPU5 | Dalea purpurea | 0–560 | – | ||
| Illinois ticktrefoil | DEIL2 | Desmodium illinoense | 0–560 | – | ||
| blacksamson echinacea | ECAN2 | Echinacea angustifolia | 0–560 | – | ||
| Engelmann's daisy | ENPE4 | Engelmannia peristenia | 0–560 | – | ||
| buckwheat | ERIOG | Eriogonum | 0–560 | – | ||
| Leavenworth's eryngo | ERLE11 | Eryngium leavenworthii | 0–560 | – | ||
| justiceweed | EULE | Eupatorium leucolepis | 0–560 | – | ||
| snow on the mountain | EUMA8 | Euphorbia marginata | 0–560 | – | ||
| beeblossom | GAURA | Gaura | 0–560 | – | ||
| Dakota mock vervain | GLBI2 | Glandularia bipinnatifida | 0–560 | – | ||
| Maximilian sunflower | HEMA2 | Helianthus maximiliani | 0–560 | – | ||
| bluet | HOUST | Houstonia | 0–560 | – | ||
| coastal indigo | INMI | Indigofera miniata | 0–560 | – | ||
| trailing krameria | KRLA | Krameria lanceolata | 0–560 | – | ||
| dotted blazing star | LIPU | Liatris punctata | 0–560 | – | ||
| Nuttall's sensitive-briar | MINU6 | Mimosa nuttallii | 0–560 | – | ||
| beebalm | MONAR | Monarda | 0–560 | – | ||
| cobaea beardtongue | PECO4 | Penstemon cobaea | 0–560 | – | ||
| prairie coneflower | RUFUP | Rudbeckia fulgida var. palustris | 0–560 | – | ||
| pitcher sage | SAAZG | Salvia azurea var. grandiflora | 0–560 | – | ||
| compassplant | SILA3 | Silphium laciniatum | 0–560 | – | ||
| Carolina horsenettle | SOCA3 | Solanum carolinense | 0–560 | – | ||
| amberique-bean | STHE9 | Strophostyles helvola | 0–560 | – | ||
| false gaura | STLI2 | Stenosiphon linifolius | 0–560 | – | ||
| white heath aster | SYERE | Symphyotrichum ericoides var. ericoides | 0–560 | – | ||
| Baldwin's ironweed | VEBA | Vernonia baldwinii | 0–560 | – | ||
|
Shrub/Vine
|
||||||
| 6 | Shrubs/Vines | 448–1121 | ||||
| catclaw acacia | ACGR | Acacia greggii | 0–1121 | – | ||
| snailseed | CODI | Cocculus diversifolius | 0–1121 | – | ||
| stretchberry | FOPU2 | Forestiera pubescens | 0–1121 | – | ||
| Carolina buckthorn | FRCA13 | Frangula caroliniana | 0–1121 | – | ||
| Virginia creeper | PAQU2 | Parthenocissus quinquefolia | 0–1121 | – | ||
| plum | PRUNU | Prunus | 0–1121 | – | ||
| fragrant sumac | RHAR4 | Rhus aromatica | 0–1121 | – | ||
| winged sumac | RHCO | Rhus copallinum | 0–1121 | – | ||
| greenbrier | SMILA2 | Smilax | 0–1121 | – | ||
|
Tree
|
||||||
| 7 | Trees | 448–1121 | ||||
| pecan | CAIL2 | Carya illinoinensis | 0–1121 | – | ||
| hackberry | CELTI | Celtis | 0–1121 | – | ||
| Ashe's juniper | JUAS | Juniperus ashei | 0–1121 | – | ||
| Pinchot's juniper | JUPI | Juniperus pinchotii | 0–1121 | – | ||
| eastern redcedar | JUVI | Juniperus virginiana | 0–1121 | – | ||
| honey mesquite | PRGL2 | Prosopis glandulosa | 0–1121 | – | ||
| plum | PRUNU | Prunus | 0–1121 | – | ||
| live oak | QUVI | Quercus virginiana | 0–1121 | – | ||
| black willow | SANI | Salix nigra | 0–1121 | – | ||
| western soapberry | SASAD | Sapindus saponaria var. drummondii | 0–1121 | – | ||
| bully | SIDER2 | Sideroxylon | 0–1121 | – | ||
| cedar elm | ULCR | Ulmus crassifolia | 0–1121 | – | ||
| Hercules' club | ZACL | Zanthoxylum clava-herculis | 0–1121 | – | ||
Interpretations
Animal community
Migratory bison herds grazed this site historically. Deer and turkey were found mostly along the wooded streams occasionally feeding on the adjacent open prairie. Large predators such as wolves, coyotes, mountain lions and black bear roamed throughout the area. Today, white-tailed deer, turkey, bobwhite quail, bobcats and coyotes along with resident and migratory birds and small mammals find use this site for at least a portion of their habitat needs. As the tallgrass community changes through the various vegetative states, the quality of the habitat may improve for some species such as songbirds, deer and goats and decline for others such as cattle.
Domestic livestock are the dominant grazer of the site today. Lower successional level may meet some wildlife species requirements very well, but may not be nearly as productive for livestock grazing purposes. Neither may it be as capable of satisfying important ecological functions such as nutrient cycling, hydrologic protection, plant community stability or soil protection.
Management practices such as brush management, prescribed burning and prescribed grazing will be required in order to maintain a vegetative state in optimum habitat quality for the desired animal species.
Hydrological functions
Peak rainfall periods occur in April, May, June, September and October. Rainfall amounts may be 3 to 10 inches per event be intense. Periods of 60 plus days of little or no rainfall during the growing season are common. The site contributes runoff to the various draws, creeks, and streams that are common in the MLRA as well as serve as a riparian buffer. If the perennial grass cover is maintained in good vigor, then maximum infiltration occurs and runoff is reduced. This site is subject to periodic overflow from flooding which deposits water-borne sediment if the grass cover is adequate. More water getting into the ground means a more productive plant community. Overall watershed protection and nutrient cycling are enhanced by the tallgrass community.
The hydrology of this site may be manipulated with management to yield higher runoff volumes or greater infiltration. Management for less herbaceous cover will favor higher surface runoff while dense herbaceous cover favors water infiltration. Potential movement of soil (erosion), pesticides and both organic and inorganic nutrients (fertilizer) should always be considered when managing for higher volumes of surface runoff.
Recreational uses
Hunting, hiking, camping, equestrian, bird watching and off road vehicle use.
Wood products
None.
Other products
None.
Other information
None.
Supporting information
Inventory data references
Information presented here has been derived from NRCS clipping data and field observations of range trained personnel: James Luton RMS, Montague; William Donham, DC, Weatherford; Kent Ferguson RMS, Weatherford; Dan Caudle.
References
-
. 2021 (Date accessed). USDA PLANTS Database. http://plants.usda.gov.
-
Bailey, V. 1905. Biological Survey of Texas. North American Fauna 25:1–222.
Other references
Ajilvsgi, Geyata, Wildflowers of Texas, Shearer Publishing, Fredericksburg, Texas, 1984
Anderson, C. A. et.al, The Western Range: Letter from Sec. of Agr. in Response to Senate
Resolution No. 289, A Report on the Western Range, A great Neglected Natural Resource, Document No. 199, United States Government Printing Office, Washington , April 24, 1936
Bentley, H. L., Cattle Ranges of the Southwest: A History of the Exhaustion of the Pasturage and Suggestions for Its Restoration, USDA Farmer’s Bulletin No. 72, Abilene, Texas, 1898
Bogusch, E. R., Brush Invasion in the Rio Grande Plain of Texas, Texas Journal of Science, 1952
Bonnell, G. W., Topographical descriptions of Texas, Clark, Wing and Brown, Austin, 1840
Box, T. W., Brush, fire and West Texas Rangeland, Proceedings of the Tall Timbers Fire Ecology Conference, 1967
Bray, W. L., Forest Resources of Texas, 600 Acres Cedar Brake Burned at Marble Falls July, 1901, USDA, Bulletin No. 47 Bureau of Forestry,
Bray, W. L., The timber of the Edwards Plateau of Texas: It’s Relation to Climate, Water Supply and Soil, USDA, Forest Bulletin No 49, 1904
Clambey, Gary K, The Prairie: Past, Present, and Future, Proceedings of the Ninth North American Prairie Conference, Tri-College University Center for Environmental Studies, Fargo North Dakota, October, 1986
Clements, Dr. Frederic E., Dynamics of Vegetation, The H. W. Wilson Company, New York, 1949
Clements, Frederic E., Plant Succession and Indicators: A Definitive Edition of Plant Succession and Plant Indicators, The H. W. Wilson Company, New York City 1928
Collins, O. B., Smeins, Fred E & Johnson, M.C., Plant Communities of the Blackland Prairie of Texas, In Prairie: A Multiple View, University of North Dakota Press, Grand Forks, North Dakota, 1975
Coranado, Francisco V., Early Spanish Explorations of New Mexico and Texas, Journal of Pedro de Castenda, who was the historian for the Expedition of Francisco V. Coronado, April, 1541
Custis, Peter & Freeman, Jefferson and Southwestern Exploration: The Freeman and Curtis Accounts of the Red River Expedition of 1806, Norman, University of Oklahoma Press, 1984
Custis, Peter, The Ecology of the Red River in 1806: Peter Custis and Early Southwestern Natural History, Southern Historical Quarterly, 1806
Dary, David A., The Buffalo Book: The Saga of an American Symbol, A Spellbinding recreation of lore, legend and fact about the great American Bison,
Diamond, David & Smeins, Fred E., Remnant Grassland Vegetation and Ecological Affinities of the Upper Coastal Prairie of Texas, The American Midland Naturalist 110, The University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, Indiana, August 28, 1984
Diamond, David D., Texas Prairies: Almost Gone, Almost Forgotten, Texas Parks and Wildlife, Vol. 48, No. 3, March, 1990
Diggs, George M., Liscomb, & O’Kennor, Skinners & Mahler’s Illustrated Flora of North Central Texas, Botanical Research Institute of Texas, Fort Worth, Texas, 1999
Dyksterhuis, E. J., The Vegetation of the Fort Worth Prairie, Contribution No 146 from the Department of Botany, University of Nebraska, January, 1946
Flores, Dan, Indian Use of Range Resources, Texas Tech Department of History, 20th Annual Range Management Conference, Lubbock, Texas, About 1990
Flores, Dan, The Red River Branch of the Alabama-Coushatta Indians: An Ethnohistory, Southern Studies Journal 16, Spring 1977
Foreman, Grant, Adventure on the Red River, Norman, University of Oklahoma Press, 1937
Foster, J.H., The Spread of Timbered Areas in Central Texas, Journal of Forestry No. 15, 1917
Gard, Wayne, The Chisholm Trail, Norman, University of Oklahoma Press, 1954
Geiser, S. W., Naturalists of the Frontier, Southern Methodist University Press, Dallas, Texas 1948
Gey, Kenneth, et.al, White-tailed Deer, Their Foods and Management in the Cross Timbers, A Samuel Roberts Nobel Foundation Publication, 1991
Gibson, A.M., From the Brazos to the North Fork: The Autobiography of Otto Koeltzow, The Chronicles of Oklahoma, University of Oklahoma, Part 1 & 2, Vol. XL, No. 1, 1962
Hignight, K.W., et. Al, Grasses of the Texas Cross Timbers and Prairies, MP-1657, Texas Agricultrual Experiment Station, College Station, Texas 1988
Jackson, A.S., Wildfires in the Great Plains Grassland, Proceedings of the Tall Timbers Fire Ecology Conference, 1965
Jenkins, John Holmes III, Recollections of Early Texas, The Memoirs of John Holland Jenkins, University of Texas Press, Austin Texas, 1958
Johnston, M.C, Past and Present Grasslands of Southern Texas and Northeastern Mexico, Ecology 44, 1963
Jordan, Gilbert J., Yesterday in the Texas Hill Country, Texas A&M University Press, College Station, Texas, 1979
Jordan, Terry G., German Seed in Texas Soil, Immigrants Farmers in Nineteenth-Century Texas, University of Texas Press, Austin, Texas, 1966
Kelton, Elmer, History of Rancher Use of Range Resources, 20th Annual Ranch Management Conference, Lubbock, Texas, September 30, 1983
Kelton, Elmer, West Texas: From Settlement to the Present, Talk presented to Texas Section, Society for Range Management, San Angelo, Texas October 8, 1993
Kendall, G. W., Narrative of the Texas Sante Fe Expedition, Vol. I, Wiley and Putman, London, 1844
King, I. M., John Q. Meusebach, German Colonizer in Texas, University of Texas Press, Austin, Texas, 1967
Kruger, M.A. P., Second Fatherland: The Life and Fortunes of a German Immigrant, Texas A&M University Press, College Station, Texas 1976
Kurlansky, Mark, Salt – A World History, Walter Publishing Company, New York, NY, USA 2002
Launchbaugh, J.L., Vegetational Changes in the San Antonio Prairie Associated with Grazing, retirement from grazing, and abandonment from cultivation, Ecol. Monogr., 25, 1955
Lehmann, V. W., Fire in the Range of the Attwater’s Prairie Chicken, Proceedings of the Tall Timbers Fire Ecology Conference, 1965
Marcy, R. B., His diary as captain of 5th Infantry U.S. Army, 31st Cong., 1st Sess., U. S. Senate Exec. Doc., Vol. 14, 1849 –1850
Marcy, R. B., Thirty Years of Army Life on the Border, Harper & Fros., Franklin Square, New York, 1866
Marks, Paula Mitchell, The American Gold Rush Era: 1848 – 1900, William Morrow and Company, Inc., New York, 1994
Martin, P.S., Vanshings, and Future of the Prairie, Geoscience and Man, 1965
Moorehead, M.L., Commerce of the Prairies by Josiah Gregg, University of Oklahoma Press, Norman, Oklahoma 1954
Murrah, David J., C. C. Slaughter, Rancher, Banker, Baptist, University of Texas Press, Austin, Texas 1981
Newcomb, S.P., Journal of a trip from the Clear Fork of the Brazos to the San Saba River, Addenda in Interwoven by Sallie R. Matthews, Reprint by Hertzog, El Paso, Texas 1958
Norton-Griffiths,M., The Influence of Grazing, Browsing, and Fire on the Vegetation of the Serengeti, In Serengeti Dynamics of an Ecosystem, Edited by A.R.E Barnes and Company, New York, 1976
Nuez, Cabeza de Vaca, The Journey of Alvar Nuez Cabeza de Vaca and His Companions for Florida to the Pacific 1528 – 1536, Edited with Introduction by A. F. Bandeleir, A.S. Barnes and Company, New York, 1905
Odum, E.P., Fundamentals of Ecology, 3rd Edition, W.B. Saunders Company, Philadelphia, 1971
Olmsted, Frederick Law, A Journey through Texas, Or, A Saddle-Trip on the Southwestern Frontier, University of Texas Press, Austin, Texas, 1857
Ormsby, Waterman L., The Butterfield Overland Mail, The Huntington Library San Marino, California, 1942
Parker, William B., Notes Taken during the Expedition through Unexplored Texas: With Capitan Randolph March and Major Robert S. Neighbors in 1854. Transcript given Archer County Soil Conservation Service by K.F. Neighbors
Parker, A.A., Trip to West and Texas, Comprising a Journey of 8,000 Miles, Through New York, Michigan, Illinois, Missouri, Louisiana and Texas in the Autumn and Winter of 1834 – 1835, 2nd Edition William White, Concord, New Hampshire 1836
Riskind, David H. & Diamond, David D., Edwards Plateau Vegetation, B Amos & F.R. Gehlbach, Baylor University Press, 1988
Roemer, F, Texas with Particular Reference to German Immigrants: The Physical Appearance of the Country, Standard Printing Company, San Antonio, Texas 1935
Sauer, C. O., Man’s Dominance by Use of Fire, Geoscience and Man, 1975
Smeins, Fred E. & Diamond, David D., Composition, Classification and Species Response Patterns of Remnant Tallgrass Prairies in Texas, The American Midland Naturalist 113, The University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, Indiana, 1985
Smeins, Fred E. & Diamond, David D., Remnant Grasslands of the Fayette Prairie, The American Midland Naturalist 110, The University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, Indiana, 1983
Smith, Jared.G., Grazing problems in the Southwest and How to Meet Them, USDA, Division Agronomy, Bulletin No. 16, 1899
Spaeth, Kenneth E, Grazingland Hydrology Issues: Perspectives for the 21st Century, Published by the Society for Range Management, Denver, Colorado, 1996
Stefferud, Alfred, Grass: The Yearbook of Agriculture 1948, USDA, U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington 1948
Stoddart, Laurence A., Range Management, McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., New York, 1955
Terry, J. Dale, Explorations of the Big Wichita, Etc., Terry Bros., Printers, Wichita Falls, Texas August, 1962.
Tharp, B. C., Structure of the Texas Vegetation East of the 98th Meridian, University of Texas Bulletin No 2606, 1926
Unknown, Author, Saga of the Buffalo: From Multitudes to Near Extinction, Ranch Magazine, San Angelo, Texas November, 1994
Unknown, Timber of the Edwards Plateau of Texas, Cedar Brake Fires, More Cedars by Fire than by the Axe 1880 – 1904, USDA, Bulletin No. 49, Bureau of Forestry
Vasey, Dr. George, Report of an Investigation of the Forage Plants of Western Texas, USDA Publication, January 17, 1888, Houston, Texas
Vine, Robert A., Trees, Shrubs and Wood Vines of the Southwest, University of Texas, Austin, Texas, 1960
Webb, W. P., The Great Plains, Gossett and Dunlap, New York, 1965
Williams, Jesse Wallace, Old Texas Trails, USA, Eakin Press, Burnet, Texas 1979
Wright, Henry A., Fire Ecology: United States and Southern Canada, Awiley-Interscience Publication, New York, 1982
Technical Reviewers:
Mark Moseley, Acting State Rangeland Management Specialist
Kent Ferguson, Zone Rangeland Management Specialist
Jerry Rives, Zone Soil Scientist
Ricky Linex, Zone Biologist
Justin Clary, Rangeland Management Specialist
Contributors
Earl Hogan & Dalton Merz
Joe Norris
PES edits by Colin Walden, Stillwater Soil Survey Office
Approval
Bryan Christensen, 9/21/2023
Acknowledgments
Site Development and Testing Plan:
Future work, as described in a Project Plan, to validate the information in this Provisional Ecological Site Description is needed. This will include field activities to collect low, medium and high intensity sampling, soil correlations, and analysis of that data. Annual field reviews should be done by soil scientists and vegetation specialists. A final field review, peer review, quality control, and quality assurance reviews of the ESD will be needed to produce the final document. Annual reviews of the Project Plan are to be conducted by the Ecological Site Technical Team.
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) | Lem Creswell, Zone RMS, NRCS, Weatherford, Texas |
|---|---|
| Contact for lead author | 817-596-2865 |
| Date | 01/16/2006 |
| Approved by | Bryan Christensen |
| Approval date | |
| Composition (Indicators 10 and 12) based on | Annual Production |
Indicators
-
Number and extent of rills:
None. Current or past formation of rills are not present. -
Presence of water flow patterns:
None. This site rarely has flow patterns. Some are expected to be around surface obstacles. -
Number and height of erosional pedestals or terracettes:
None. Some very minor pedestalling may occur in the shallow, lower production portions of the sites. Rarely should they be over 1/4 inch height. -
Bare ground from Ecological Site Description or other studies (rock, litter, lichen, moss, plant canopy are not bare ground):
0 to 10 percent bare ground. Small and non-connected areas. -
Number of gullies and erosion associated with gullies:
Drainages are represented as natural stable channels; vegetation is common and no signs of erosion. -
Extent of wind scoured, blowouts and/or depositional areas:
None. -
Amount of litter movement (describe size and distance expected to travel):
Minimal and short. Less than 6 inches. Only associated with water flow patterns following extremely high intensity rainfall. -
Soil surface (top few mm) resistance to erosion (stability values are averages - most sites will show a range of values):
Surface is resistant to erosion. -
Soil surface structure and SOM content (include type of structure and A-horizon color and thickness):
Very dark grayish brown clay loam surface. Soil Organic Matter is 1 to 4 percent. -
Effect of community phase composition (relative proportion of different functional groups) and spatial distribution on infiltration and runoff:
High canopy, basal cover and density with small interspaces make rainfall impact negligible. This site has well drained soils, slowly permeable with 0 to 2 percent slopes which allows negligible run off and erosion. -
Presence and thickness of compaction layer (usually none; describe soil profile features which may be mistaken for compaction on this site):
None to minimal, not restrictive to water movement and root penetration. -
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:
Warm-season tallgrasses >>Sub-dominant:
Warm-season midgrasses >Other:
warm-season shortgrasses > forbs = cool-season grasses > trees > shrubs/vinesAdditional:
-
Amount of plant mortality and decadence (include which functional groups are expected to show mortality or decadence):
Minimal under normal weather conditions. Grasses almost always show some decadence and mortality. -
Average percent litter cover (%) and depth ( in):
Litter is dominantly herbaceous and covers all plant and rock interspaces. -
Expected annual annual-production (this is TOTAL above-ground annual-production, not just forage annual-production):
4000 to 10,0000 pounds per acre. 4000 pounds in below average moisture years, 7000 pounds in "normal" years and 10,000 pounds in above average years. -
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:
Ashe juniper, prickly pear and mesquite are the primary invaders. -
Perennial plant reproductive capability:
All perennial plants are capable of reproduction except during periods of prolonged drought conditions, heavy natural herbivory and intense wildfires.
Print Options
Sections
Font
Other
The 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.
Click on box and path labels to scroll to the respective text.