Ecological dynamics
The information in this Ecological Site Description, including the state-and-transition model (STM), was developed based on historical data, current field data, professional experience, and a review of the scientific literature. As a result, all possible scenarios or plant species may not be included. Key indicator plant species, disturbances, and ecological processes are described to inform land management decisions.
The MLRA lies within the tallgrass prairie ecosystem of the Midwest. The heterogeneous topography of the area results in variable microclimates and fuel matrices that in support prairies, savannas, and forests. Loamy Floodplain Forests form an aspect of this vegetative continuum. This ecological site occurs on floodplains on somewhat poorly-drained soils. Species characteristic of this ecological site consist of woody and herbaceous vegetation tolerant of periodic flooding.
Rare to occasional flooding is the dominant disturbance factor in Loamy Floodplain Forests, and storm damage and pests are secondary disturbances. Seasonal flooding occurs every two to twenty years, and flooding can persist for up to seven days at a time. Damage to trees from wind storms can vary from minor, patchy effects of individual trees to stand effects that temporarily affect community structure and species richness and diversity (Irland 2000; Peterson 2000). Trees are susceptible to a variety of pests (e.g., insects, fungi, cankers, wilts), therefore periodic insect and disease outbreaks play an important role in local canopy structure.
Today, many Loamy Floodplain Forests have been reduced as a result of conversion to pasture. A few sites have been cleared and drained for agricultural production. Remnant sites have been degraded due to significant changes to the natural hydrologic regime and diminished water quality in the watershed. The state-and-transition model that follows provides a detailed description of each state, community phase, pathway, and transition. This model is based on available experimental research, field observations, literature reviews, professional consensus, and interpretations.
State 1
Reference State
The reference plant community is categorized as a floodplain forest community, dominated by woody and herbaceous vegetation tolerant of periodic flooding. The two community phases within the reference state are dependent on a regular flood regime. The amount and duration of flooding alters species composition, cover, and extent. Periodic pest outbreaks and wind storms have more localized impacts in the reference phases, but do contribute to overall species composition, diversity, cover, and productivity.
Community 1.1
Green Ash – Common Hackberry/Roughleaf Dogwood – Riverbank Grape/Virginia Wildrye
Green Ash – Common Hackberry/Roughleaf Dogwood – Riverbank Grape/Virginia Wildrye – Canadian Woodnettle – Sites in this reference community phase are a closed canopy forest (80 to 100 percent cover), defined by a mixture of trees with no clear dominant species. Green ash, common hackberry, bur oak, and American elm are common trees on the site (White and Madan7 1978). Trees are large (21 to 33-inch DBH) and range in height from 30 to over 80 feet tall (LANDFIRE 2009). Virginia wildrye and Canadian woodnettle are characteristic species of the herbaceous layer, but other species can include nodding fescue (Festuca subverticillata (Pers.) Alexeev), stickywilly (Galium aparine L.), and white avens (Geum canadense Jacq.) (NatureServe 2018). Rare to occasional flooding every 2 to 20 years will maintain this phase, but a major flood event can shift the community to an earlier successional floodplain forest, phase 1.2 (Myers and Buchanan 1984).
Community 1.2
Silver Maple – Green Ash/Riverbank Grape/Jumpseed
Silver Maple – Green Ash/Riverbank Grape/Jumpseed – This reference community phase represents a plant community in recovery from a major flood event. Mature trees are still present, but the more disturbance-tolerant species becomes important in the canopy, including silver maple and green ash. Shrubs can be greatly reduced from the scouring and deposition event, leaving just woody vines. Immediately following the flood event, the herbaceous layer is likely to be comprised of mostly annuals such as jumpseed (Polygonum virginianum L.). Frequent flooding will maintain this community phase, a but lack of disturbances will eventually allow the site to shift back to phase 1.1 (Myers and Buchman 1984).
Pathway 1.1A
Community 1.1 to 1.2
Major flood event
Pathway 1.2A
Community 1.2 to 1.1
Natural succession as a result of no disturbance
State 2
Hydrologically Altered State
Agricultural tile drainage, stream channelization, and levee construction in hydrologically-connected waters have drastically changed the natural hydrologic regime of Loamy Floodplain Forests. In addition, increased amounts of precipitation and intensity have amplified flooding events (Pryor et al. 2014). This has resulted in a type conversion from the species-rich forest to a ruderal floodplain forest state. In addition, exotic species have encroached and continuously spread, reducing native diversity and ecosystem stability.
Community 2.1
Silver Maple – Green Ash/Common Hackberry/Canadian Woodnettle – Creeping Jenny
Silver Maple – Green Ash/Common Hackberry/Canadian Woodnettle – Creeping Jenny – This community phase represents a transition in plant community composition as a result of an altered hydrologic regime. Silver maple, green ash, American elm, and slippery elm become the dominant tree canopy species. Common hackberry, honeylocust (Gleditsia triacanthos L.), and boxelder (Acer negundo L.) are dominant subcanopy species, while roughleaf dogwood is a dominant shrub. The herbaceous layer is nearly continuous but lacking in diversity. Canadian woodnettle and Virginia wildrye are common native species, and creeping jenny (Lysimachia nummularia L.) can be a frequently encountered non-native species.
Community 2.2
Boxelder – Silver Maple/Roughleaf Dogwood/Creeping Jenny
Boxelder – Silver Maple/Roughleaf Dogwood/Creeping Jenny – This community phase represents persisting changes to the natural hydrology of the watershed. The overstory canopy continues to shift, becoming dominated by boxelder due to frequent disturbances (Rosario 1988). Silver maple, green ash, and American elm can be co-dominant canopy species, and roughleaf dogwood remains in the shrub layer. The understory may continue to be invaded by more non-native species as a result of the frequent disturbances.
Pathway 2.1A
Community 2.1 to 2.2
Increasing frequency of disturbances
Pathway 2.2A
Community 2.2 to 2.1
Decreasing frequency of disturbances
State 3
Forage State
The forage state occurs when the reference state is converted to a farming system that emphasizes domestic livestock production known as grassland agriculture. Fire suppression, periodic cultural treatments (e.g., clipping, drainage, soil amendment applications, planting new species and/or cultivars, mechanical harvesting) and grazing by domesticated livestock transition and maintain this state (USDA-NRCS 2003). Early settlers seeded non-native species, such as smooth brome (Bromus inermis Leyss.) and Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis L.), to help extend the grazing season. Over time, as lands were continuously harvested or grazed by herds of cattle, the non-native species were able to spread and expand across the landscape, reducing the native species diversity and ecological function.
Community 3.1
Hayfield
Hayfield – Sites in this community phase consist of forage plants that are planted and mechanically harvested. Mechanical harvesting removes much of the aboveground biomass and nutrients that feed the soil microorganisms (Franzluebbers et al. 2000; USDA-NRCS 2003). As a result, soil biology is reduced leading to decreases in nutrient uptake by plants, soil organic matter, and soil aggregation. Frequent biomass removal can also reduce the site’s carbon sequestration capacity (Skinner 2008).
Community 3.2
Continuous Pastured Grazing System
Continuous Pastured Grazing System – This community phase is characterized by continuous grazing where domestic livestock graze a pasture for the entire season. Depending on stocking density, this can result in lower forage quality and productivity, weed invasions, and uneven pasture use. Continuous grazing can also increase the amount of bare ground and erosion and reduce soil organic matter, cation exchange capacity, water-holding capacity, and nutrient availability and retention (Bharati et al. 2002; Leake et al. 2004; Teague et al. 2011). Smooth brome, Kentucky bluegrass, and white clover (Trifolium repens L.) are common pasture species used in this phase. Their tolerance to continuous grazing has allowed these species to dominate, sometimes completely excluding the native vegetation.
Community 3.3
Rest-Rotation Pastured Grazing System
This community phase is characterized by rotational grazing where the pasture has been subdivided into several smaller paddocks. Through the development of a grazing plan, livestock utilize one or a few paddocks, while the remaining area is rested allowing plants to restore vigor and energy reserves, deepen root systems, develop seeds, as well as allow seedling establishment (Undersander et al. 2002; USDA-NRCS 2003). Rest-rotation pastured grazing systems include deferred rotation, rest rotation, high intensity – low frequency, and short duration methods. Vegetation is generally more diverse and can include orchardgrass (Dactylis glomerata L.), timothy (Phleum pretense L.), red clover (Trifolium pratense L.), and alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.). The addition of native prairie species can further bolster plant diversity and, in turn, soil function. This community phase promotes numerous ecosystem benefits including increasing biodiversity, preventing soil erosion, maintaining and enhancing soil quality, sequestering atmospheric carbon, and improving water yield and quality (USDA-NRCS 2003).
Pathway 3.1A
Community 3.1 to 3.2
Mechanical harvesting is replaced with domestic livestock and continuous grazing
Pathway 3.1B
Community 3.1 to 3.3
Mechanical harvesting is replaced with domestic livestock and rest-rotational grazing
Pathway 3.2A
Community 3.2 to 3.1
Tillage, forage crop planting and mechanical harvesting replace grazing
Pathway 3.2B
Community 3.2 to 3.3
Implementation of rest-rotational grazing
Pathway 3.3B
Community 3.3 to 3.1
Tillage, forage crop planting and mechanical harvesting replace grazing
Pathway 3.3A
Community 3.3 to 3.2
Implementation of continuous grazing
State 4
Cropland State
The continuous use of tillage, row-crop planting, and chemicals (i.e., herbicides, fertilizers, etc.) has effectively eliminated the reference community and many of its natural ecological functions in favor of crop production. Corn and soybeans are the dominant crops for the site, and oats (Avena L.) and alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) may be rotated periodically. These areas are likely to remain in crop production for the foreseeable future.
Community 4.1
Conventional Tillage Field
Sites in this community phase typically consist of monoculture row-cropping maintained by conventional tillage practices. They are cropped in either continuous corn or corn-soybean rotations. The frequent use of deep tillage, low crop diversity, and bare soil conditions during the non-growing season negatively impacts soil health. Under these practices, soil aggregation is reduced or destroyed, soil organic matter is reduced, erosion and runoff are increased, and infiltration is decreased, which can ultimately lead to undesirable changes in the hydrology of the watershed (Tomer et al. 2005).
Community 4.2
Conservation Tillage Field
Conservation Tillage Field – This community phase is characterized by rotational crop production that utilizes various conservation tillage methods to promote soil health and reduce erosion. Conservation tillage methods include strip-till, ridge-till, vertical-till, or no-till planting systems. Strip-till keeps seedbed preparation to narrow bands less than one-third the width of the row where crop residue and soil consolidation are left undisturbed in-between seedbed areas. Strip-till planting may be completed in the fall and nutrient application either occurs simultaneously or at the time of planting. Ridge-till uses specialized equipment to create ridges in the seedbed and vegetative residue is left on the surface in between the ridges. Weeds are controlled with herbicides and/or cultivation, seedbed ridges are rebuilt during cultivation, and soils are left undisturbed from harvest to planting. Vertical-till systems employ machinery that lightly tills the soil and cuts up crop residue, mixing some of the residue into the top few inches of the soil while leaving a large portion on the surface. No-till management is the most conservative, disturbing soils only at the time of planting and fertilizer application. Compared to conventional tillage systems, conservation tillage methods can improve soil ecosystem function by reducing soil erosion, increasing organic matter and water availability, improving water quality, and reducing soil compaction.
Community 4.3
Conservation Tillage Field/Alternative Crop Field
Conservation Tillage Field/Alternative Crop Field – This community phase applies conservation tillage methods as described above as well as adds cover crop practices. Cover crops typically include nitrogen-fixing species (e.g., legumes), small grains (e.g., rye, wheat, oats), or forage covers (e.g., turnips, radishes, rapeseed). The addition of cover crops not only adds plant diversity but also promotes soil health by reducing soil erosion, limiting nitrogen leaching, suppressing weeds, increasing soil organic matter, and improving the overall soil ecosystem. In the case of small grain cover crops, surface cover and water infiltration are increased, while forage covers can be used to graze livestock or support local wildlife. Of the three community phases for this state, this phase promotes the greatest soil sustainability and improves ecological functioning within a cropland system.
Pathway 4.1A
Community 4.1 to 4.2
Less tillage, residue management
Pathway 4.1B
Community 4.1 to 4.3
Less tillage, residue management and implementation of cover cropping
Pathway 4.2A
Community 4.2 to 4.1
Intensive tillage, remove residue and reinitialize monoculture row cropping
Pathway 4.2B
Community 4.2 to 4.3
Implementation of cover cropping
Pathway 4.3B
Community 4.3 to 4.1
Intensive tillage, remove residue and reinitialize monoculture row cropping
Pathway 4.3A
Community 4.3 to 4.2
Remove cover cropping
State 5
Reconstructed Floodplain Forest State
The combination of natural and anthropogenic disturbances occurring today has resulted in numerous ecosystem health issues, and restoration back to the historic reference state may not be possible. Many natural forest communities are being stressed by non-native diseases and pests, habitat fragmentation, permanent changes in hydrologic regimes, and overabundant deer populations on top of naturally-occurring disturbances (severe weather and native pests) (IFDC 2018). However, these habitats provide multiple ecosystem services including carbon sequestration; clean air and water; soil conservation; biodiversity support; wildlife habitat; as well as a variety of cultural activities (e.g., hiking, hunting) (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 2005; IFDC 2018). Therefore, conservation of floodplain forests should still be pursued. Habitat reconstructions are an important tool for repairing natural ecological functioning and providing habitat protection for numerous species of Loamy Floodplain Forests. Therefore, ecological restoration should aim to aid the recovery of degraded, damaged, or destroyed ecosystems. A successful restoration will have the ability to structurally and functionally sustain itself, demonstrate resilience to the ranges of stress and disturbance, and create and maintain positive biotic and abiotic interactions (SER 2002). The reconstructed forest state is the result of a long-term commitment involving a multi-step, adaptive management process.
Community 5.1
Early Successional Reconstructed Forest
Early Successional Reconstructed Forest – This community phase represents the early community assembly from forest reconstruction. It is highly dependent on the current condition of the site based on past and current land management actions, invasive species, and proximity to land populated with non-native pests and diseases. Therefore, no two sites will have the same early successional composition. Technical forestry assistance should be sought to develop suitable conservation management plans.
Community 5.2
Late Successional Reconstructed Forest
Late Successional Reconstructed Forest – Appropriately timed management practices (e.g. forest stand improvement, continuing integrated pest management) applied to the early successional community phase can help increase the stand maturity, pushing the site into a late successional community phase over time. A late successional reconstructed forest will have an uneven-aged, closed canopy and a well-developed understory.
Pathway 5.2A – Reconstruction experiences a setback from extreme weather event or improper timing of management actions.
Pathway 5.1A
Community 5.1 to 5.2
Timber stand improvement practices implemented
Pathway 5.2A
Community 5.2 to 5.1
Setback from extreme weather event or improper timing of management actions
Transition T1A
State 1 to 2
Changes to natural hydroperiod and/or land abandonment
Transition T1B
State 1 to 3
Cultural treatments are implemented to increase forage quality and yield
Transition T1C
State 1 to 4
Agricultural conversion via tillage, seeding and non-selective herbicide
Transition T2A
State 2 to 3
Cultural treatments are implemented to increase forage quality and yield
Transition T2B
State 2 to 4
Agricultural conversion via tillage, seeding and non-selective herbicide
Transition R2A
State 2 to 5
Site preparation, tree planting, repair hydrology and non-native species control
Restoration pathway T3A
State 3 to 2
Changes to natural hydroperiod and/or land abandonment
Transition T3B
State 3 to 4
Agricultural conversion via tillage, seeding and non-selective herbicide
Transition R3A
State 3 to 5
Site preparation, tree planting, repair hydrology and non-native species control
Restoration pathway T4A
State 4 to 2
Changes to natural hydroperiod and/or land abandonment
Restoration pathway T4B
State 4 to 3
Cultural treatments are implemented to increase forage quality and yield
Transition R4A
State 4 to 5
Site preparation, tree planting, repair hydrology and non-native species control
Restoration pathway T5A
State 5 to 2
Changes to natural hydroperiod and/or land abandonment
Restoration pathway T5B
State 5 to 3
Cultural treatments are implemented to increase forage quality and yield
Restoration pathway T5C
State 5 to 4
Agricultural conversion via tillage, seeding and non-selective herbicide
