Natural Resources
Conservation Service

Ecological site F101XY002NY

Low Floodplain

Last updated: 5/21/2020
Accessed: 04/19/2024

Home / Esd catalog / MLRA 101X / Ecological site F101XY002NY

USC

Metric

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.

MLRA notes

Major Land Resource Area (MLRA): 101X–Ontario-Erie Plain and Finger Lakes Region

Most of the MLRA is a nearly level to rolling plain. Low remnant beach ridges are commonly interspersed with a relatively level lake plain in the northern part of the area. Drumlins (long, narrow, steep-sided, cigar shaped hills) are prominent in an east-west belt in the center of the area. The Finger Lakes Region consists of a gently sloping to rolling till plain. Elevation is 330 to 1,310 feet increasing gradually from the shores of Lake Ontario and Lake Oneida to the Allegheny Plateau, the southern border of the area. Local relief is mostly 10 feet, but the larger drumlins and many valley sides rise 80 to 330 feet above the adjacent lowlands or valley floors.

The bedrock underlying this area consists of alternating beds of limestone, dolomite, sandstone, and shale of Ordovician to Devonian age. Most of the surface of the area is covered with glacial till or lake sediments. The texture of the lake sediments is silt, loam, or sand. Ancient beaches, formed at different lake levels, form ridges along the shoreline of Lake Erie and Lake Ontario. Stratified drift (eskers and kames) and glacial outwash deposits are in many of the valleys. A large drumlin field occurs in the Finger Lakes Region.

Classification relationships

NRCS:
Land Resource Region: L - Lake States Fruit, Truck Crop, and Dairy Region
MLRA: 101 - Ontario-Erie Plain and Finger Lakes Region

Ecological site concept

Landform/Landscape Position:
The site occurs on flood plains adjacent to low gradient streams and rivers. Slopes range from 0 to 3 percent.

Soils:
The site consists of very deep, moderately well drained or somewhat poorly drained soils that have formed in recent alluvium derived predominantly from siltstone, shale, and limestone. Representative soils are Teel, Wakeville, and Oatka.

Vegetation:
Silver Maple - (Eastern Cottonwood) / Ostrich Fern - Canadian Woodnettle Floodplain Forest
Acer saccharinum - (Populus deltoides) / Matteuccia struthiopteris - Laportea canadensis Floodplain Forest

Associated sites

F101XY001NY	High Floodplain
F101XY003NY	Low Floodplain Depression

F101XY001NY

High Floodplain

F101XY003NY

Low Floodplain Depression

Table 1. Dominant plant species

Tree	(1) Acer saccharinum (2) Populus deltoides
Shrub	Not specified
Herbaceous	(1) Matteuccia struthiopteris (2) Laportea canadensis

Download full description

Physiographic features

The site occurs on flood plains adjacent to low gradient streams and rivers. Slopes range from 0 to 3 percent.

Figure 1. Low Flood Plain (Teel)

Table 2. Representative physiographic features

Landforms	(1) Flood plain
Flooding frequency	Rare to occasional

Climatic features

Table 3. Representative climatic features

Frost-free period (characteristic range)	136-140 days
Freeze-free period (characteristic range)	173-186 days
Precipitation total (characteristic range)	37-42 in
Frost-free period (actual range)	135-140 days
Freeze-free period (actual range)	167-187 days
Precipitation total (actual range)	35-42 in
Frost-free period (average)	138 days
Freeze-free period (average)	179 days
Precipitation total (average)	39 in

Characteristic range

Actual range

Bar

Line

Figure 2. Monthly precipitation range

Characteristic range

Actual range

Bar

Line

Figure 3. Monthly minimum temperature range

Characteristic range

Actual range

Bar

Line

Figure 4. Monthly maximum temperature range

Bar

Line

Figure 5. Monthly average minimum and maximum temperature

Figure 6. Annual precipitation pattern

Figure 7. Annual average temperature pattern

Climate stations used

(1) SUNY ESF SYRACUSE [USC00308386], Syracuse, NY
(2) DELANSON 2NE [USC00302031], Delanson, NY
(3) ROCHESTER GTR INTL AP [USW00014768], Rochester, NY
(4) DUNKIRK CHAUTAUQUA AP [USW00014747], Dunkirk, NY
(5) LOCKPORT 3 S [USC00304844], Lockport, NY

Soil features

The site consists of very deep, moderately well drained or somewhat poorly drained, coarse-silty soils that have formed in recent alluvium along streams. Representative soils are Teel, Wakeville, and Oatka.

Table 4. Representative soil features

Parent material	(1) Alluvium – shale and siltstone (2) Alluvium – limestone
Surface texture	(1) Silt loam (2) Silty clay loam
Drainage class	Somewhat poorly drained to moderately well drained

Parent material

(1) Alluvium – shale and siltstone
(2) Alluvium – limestone

Surface texture

(1) Silt loam

(2) Silty clay loam

Drainage class

Somewhat poorly drained to moderately well drained

Ecological dynamics

The reference community coincides with Maple - (Eastern Cottonwood) / Ostrich Fern - Canadian Woodnettle Floodplain Forest (CEGL006147). Other species include green ash, American sycamore, American elm, spicebush, dogwoods, sensitive fern, jewelweed, and numerous sedges.

The frequency, duration, and timing of floods is the primary natural disturbance affecting species composition. Flood plain forests are commonly found in early to mid-successional stages because of the dynamic nature of floodplains (Thompson and Sorenson 2000). Young alluvial forests are typically dominated by eastern cottonwood along major rivers or American sycamore in small to medium sized rivers. River types such as large, low gradient and small-medium low and high gradient rivers differ in hydrologic regime and fluvial geomorphology and consequently have different community composition (Marks et al. 2011).

Invasive exotic plants are a significant threat to the community since many can successfully displace native species. Common invasive exotic plants are Japanese barberry, Norway maple, Oriental bittersweet, European bush honeysuckle, garlic mustard, and Japanese stiltgrass.

State and transition model

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

State 1
Reference - Mixed Hardwood Forest

Characteristics and indicators. Site was not cleared or cultivated historically.

Community 1.1
Old Growth Mixed Hardwood Forest

Mature closed canopy forest.

Community 1.2
Young Forest

Early successional forest.

Pathway P
Community 1.1 to 1.2

Wind, ice storm,, insect damage.

Pathway P
Community 1.2 to 1.1

Time; succession

State 2
Managed Timber Forest

Removal of trees of commercial value. Invasive species may be present.

Community 2.1
Timber Managed Forest

Forest managed for timber, primarily oak species. Depending on type of management birch, beech, and maple may dominate following commercial timber harvest.

State 3
Invaded

Invasive species abundant. Minimally managed forest.

Community 3.1
Forest with invasive species

Non-native and invasive species present (Japanese barberry, multiflora rose, bush honeysuckle, stiltgrass.

State 4
Pastureland

Site converted to pasture for livestock grazing or hay production.

Resilience management. Must be managed (grazed, mowed, etc.) to maintain pastureland.

Community 4.1
Introduced grasses and forbs for grazing, hay production, or wildlife

Community 4.2
Woody plant encroachment

Pathway P
Community 4.1 to 4.2

Lack of management (mowing, grazing, prescribed fire)

Pathway P
Community 4.2 to 4.1

Mowing, brush management, prescribed fire.

Conservation practices

Brush Management
Prescribed Burning

State 5
Restored and/or Minimally Managed Forest

Restored forest or second-growth forest.

Characteristics and indicators. Site was cleared and/or cultivated historically.

Transition T
State 1 to 2

Timber harvest.

Transition T
State 1 to 3

Establishment of invasive species.

Transition T
State 1 to 4

Land use conversion.

Conservation practices

Land Clearing

Restoration pathway R
State 2 to 1

Conservation practices

Forest Stand Improvement
Forest Land Management
Prescribed Forestry

Transition T
State 2 to 4

Land use conversion

Conservation practices

Land Clearing

Restoration pathway R
State 2 to 5

Forestland restoration

Restoration pathway R
State 3 to 1

Invasive species management/removal.

Conservation practices

Invasive Plant Species Control
Invasive Species Pest Management

Transition T
State 3 to 4

Land use conversion

Restoration pathway T
State 4 to 5

Forest land restoration

Transition T
State 5 to 4

Land use conversion

Additional community tables

Supporting information

Inventory data references

Site Development and Testing Plan
Future work to validate the vegetation information in this provisional ecological site description is needed. This will include field activities to collect low and medium intensity sampling and analysis of that data. 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 approved level document. Reviews of the project plan are to be conducted by the Ecological Site Technical Team.

Other references

Edinger, G.J., Evans, D.J., Gebauer, S., Howard, T.G., Hunt, D.M., and A.M. Olivero, A.M. (eds.). 2014. Ecological Communities of New York State, Second Edition: A revised and expanded edition of Carol Reschke's Ecological Communities of New York State. New York Natural Heritage Program, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Albany, NY.

Thompson, E.H. and Sorenson, E.R., 2000. Wetland, woodland, wildland. Vermont Department of Fish and Wildlife and The Nature Conservancy. Publ. University Press of New England.

Approval

Nels Barrett, 5/21/2020

Rangeland health reference sheet

Interpreting Indicators of Rangeland Health is a qualitative assessment protocol used to determine ecosystem condition based on benchmark characteristics described in the Reference Sheet. A suite of 17 (or more) indicators are typically considered in an assessment. The ecological site(s) representative of an assessment location must be known prior to applying the protocol and must be verified based on soils and climate. Current plant community cannot be used to identify the ecological site.

Author(s)/participant(s)
Contact for lead author
Date	09/06/2022
Approved by	Nels Barrett
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

Search

Natural ResourcesConservation Service

Ecological site F101XY002NY

Low Floodplain

Last updated: 5/21/2020 Accessed: 04/19/2024

General information

MLRA notes

Classification relationships

Ecological site concept

Associated sites

Table 1. Dominant plant species

Ecosystem states

States 2 and 5 (additional transitions)

State 1 submodel, plant communities

State 2 submodel, plant communities

State 3 submodel, plant communities

State 4 submodel, plant communities

Natural Resources
Conservation Service

Last updated: 5/21/2020
Accessed: 04/19/2024