Natural Resources
Conservation Service
Ecological site F133BY014TX
Creek Bottomland
Last updated: 12/13/2023
Accessed: 11/24/2024
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.
MLRA notes
Major Land Resource Area (MLRA): 133B–Western Coastal Plain
Major Land Resource Area (MLRA) 133B, Western Coastal Plain is in eastern Texas, western Louisiana, and the southwest corner of Arkansas. The area is dominated by coniferous forest covering 45,450 square miles (29,088,000 acres). The region is a hugely diverse transition zone between the eastern deciduous forests and the central grasslands to the west.
Classification relationships
NatureServe, 2002.
- CEGL004911 – Hardwood Small Stream Forest
Soil Survey Staff, 2011
- Woodland Suitability Group – 1w8 Bottomlands
USDA-Natural Resources Conservation Service, 2006.
-Major Land Resource Area (MLRA) 133B
Van Kley et. al., 2007
- 231eg.12.4 Minor Stream Bottoms Landtype
Ecological site concept
The ecological site has developed along fast moving water bodies that flood occasionally to frequently. The sites do not pond water and are moderately well to well drained. The plant communities are not typically hydrophitic, but are influenced by the flooding regime.
Associated sites
| F133BY011TX |
Deep Sandy Terrace Sites are located in a higher terrace position and do not flood on a regular basis. |
|---|---|
| F133BY012TX |
Wet Terrace Sites are located in a higher terrace position. |
| F133BY013TX |
Terrace Site are on a higher terrace landscape. |
Similar sites
| F133BY017TX |
Loamy Bottomland Sites are located on wider loamy bottoms and flood for longer duration. |
|---|---|
| F133BY018TX |
Clayey Bottomland Sites are located on wider clayey bottoms and flood for longer duration. |
| F133BY016TX |
Sandy Bottomland Sites are located on wider sandy bottoms and flood for longer duration. |
Table 1. Dominant plant species
| Tree |
(1) Quercus nigra |
|---|---|
| Shrub |
Not specified |
| Herbaceous |
(1) Chasmanthium latifolium |
Physiographic features
These soils formed in recent alluvium derived from coastal plain sediments on flood plains. The slope ranges from 0 to 1 percent. These soils are commonly flooded. Typically, they flood 1 to 3 times during most years. Periods of flooding are very brief to brief.
Table 2. Representative physiographic features
| Landforms |
(1)
Coastal plain
> Flood plain
|
|---|---|
| Runoff class | Negligible to low |
| Flooding duration | Very brief (4 to 48 hours) to long (7 to 30 days) |
| Flooding frequency | Occasional to frequent |
| Ponding frequency | None |
| Elevation | 15 – 198 m |
| Slope | 0 – 1% |
| Water table depth | 30 – 122 cm |
| Aspect | Aspect is not a significant factor |
Climatic features
The climate of the Western Coastal Plain (MLRA 133B) is humid subtropical with hot summers and mild winters. Canadian air masses that move southward across Texas and Louisiana over the Gulf of Mexico in winter produce cool, cloudy, rainy weather with only rare cold waves that moderate in one or two days. Precipitation is distributed fairly even throughout the year and is most often in the form of slow and gentle rains.
Spring weather can be variable. March is relatively dry while thunderstorm activities increase in April and May. Occasional slow-moving thunderstorms or other weather disturbances may dump excessive amounts of precipitation on the area. Fall has moderate temperatures. Fall experiences an increase of precipitation and frequently has periods of mild, dry, sunny weather. Heavy rain may occur early in the fall because of tropical disturbances, which move westward from the gulf. Tropical storms are a threat to the area in the summer and fall but severe storms are rare. Prolonged droughts and snowfall are rare.
The total annual precipitation ranges from 39 inches in the western part of the region to 60 inches in the eastern part of the region. Approximately 50 percent of the rainfall occurs between April and September, which includes the growing season for most crops. Thunderstorms occur on about 50 days each year and most occur during the summer.
The average relative humidity in mid-afternoon is about 60 percent. Humidity is higher at night and the average at dawn is about 90 percent. The sun shines 70 percent of the time in summer and 50 percent in winter. The prevailing wind is from the south-southeast. Average wind-speed is highest at 11 miles per hour in spring.
Table 3. Representative climatic features
| Frost-free period (average) | 219 days |
|---|---|
| Freeze-free period (average) | 252 days |
| Precipitation total (average) | 1,397 mm |
Figure 1. Monthly precipitation range
Figure 2. Monthly average minimum and maximum temperature
Figure 3. Annual precipitation pattern
Figure 4. Annual average temperature pattern
Climate stations used
-
(1) CALHOUN RSCH STN [USC00161411], Calhoun, LA
-
(2) CARTHAGE [USC00411500], Carthage, TX
-
(3) HUNTSVILLE [USC00414382], Huntsville, TX
-
(4) RUSK [USC00417841], Rusk, TX
-
(5) TOLEDO BEND DAM [USC00419068], Anacoco, TX
-
(6) CALION L&D [USC00031140], El Dorado, AR
-
(7) JENA 4 WSW [USC00164696], Trout, LA
-
(8) DEKALB [USC00412352], Simms, TX
-
(9) GILMER 4 WNW [USC00413546], Gilmer, TX
-
(10) MAGNOLIA [USC00034548], Magnolia, AR
-
(11) SHERIDAN [USC00036562], Sheridan, AR
-
(12) MINDEN [USC00166244], Minden, LA
Influencing water features
The soils are not classified as hydric, although they do flood frequently to occasionally throughout the year. Plants nearest the water, or areas staying inundated for long periods may have hydrophytic vegetation.
Wetland description
The sites are not generally classified as a wetland but onsite field investigations should occur.
Soil features
Iulus is a representative soil of the Creek Bottomlands. The series consists of very deep, moderately well drained, moderately permeable soils on flood plains. These soils formed in recent alluvium derived from coastal plain sediments. The slope ranges from 0 to 1 percent. Other soils correlated to this ecological site include: Dardanelle, Dela, Ennis, Hannahatchee, Iuka, Iulus, Jena, Kosse, Koury, Laneville, Owentown, and Thenas.
Table 4. Representative soil features
| Parent material |
(1)
Alluvium
–
sandstone
|
|---|---|
| Surface texture |
(1) Fine sandy loam (2) Silt loam (3) Coarse sandy loam |
| Family particle size |
(1) Loamy |
| Drainage class | Moderately well drained to well drained |
| Permeability class | Moderate to slow |
| Soil depth | 203 cm |
| Surface fragment cover <=3" | 0% |
| Surface fragment cover >3" | 0% |
| Available water capacity (0-101.6cm) |
12.7 – 17.78 cm |
| Calcium carbonate equivalent (0-101.6cm) |
0% |
| 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) |
4.5 – 7 |
| Subsurface fragment volume <=3" (Depth not specified) |
0% |
| Subsurface fragment volume >3" (Depth not specified) |
0% |
Ecological dynamics
The information in this ecological site description (ESD), including the state-and-transition model (STM), was developed using archeological and historical data, professional experience, and scientific studies. The information is representative of a complex set of plant communities. Not all scenarios or plants are included. Key indicator plants, animals, and ecological processes are described to inform land management decisions.
Introduction – Southern Arkansas, western Louisiana, and eastern Texas have been deemed the Pineywoods because of the vast expanse of pine trees. The region represents the western edge of the southern coniferous belt. Historically, the area was covered by pines with mixed hardwoods, sparse shrubs, and a diverse understory of grasses and forbs. Fire played a significant role in reducing the woody competition that generally out-competes the herbaceous understory layer. Fire suppression and land conversion have reduced the amount of historical communities in existence today.
Background – Prior to settlement by the Europeans, the historic plant community for the Creek Bottomlands was a Water Oak/White Oak (Quercus nigra/Quercus alba) Forest. Remnants of this presumed historic plant community still exist where the historic conditions are still in place. Evidence of the reference state is found in accounts of early historic explorers to the area, historic forest and biological survey teams, as well as recent ecological studies in the last 30 years.
Settlement Management – As human settlement increased throughout the area, so did the increase in logging and grazing by domestic livestock. Oftentimes, an early settler would make camp by logging pines in the area for lodging. The accompanying livestock would graze the upland woodlands filled with warm-season forage during the summer. As the summer grazing season would end, the livestock would naturally begin grazing in the bottoms to forage on large cane breaks and other cool-season plants found in the area. With early settlement also came the arrival of the railroads, initially causing a mosaic effect (small areas being cut) across the landscape.
Eventually, the logging became so extensive that by the 1930’s most of the region had been cut-over. Replanting trees to historic communities was not common and early foresters began planting loblolly pine (Pinus taeda) for its quick growth. The loblolly pines were commonly grown plantation style (e.g., site preparation, planting, long-term weed control). This, coupled with the advent of heavy site preparation machinery made the conversion from low-grade hardwood possible.
Current Management and State – Today much of the remnant forest is gone, replaced by tree plantations, crops, and pastures. The largest bottomlands of disappearance are areas converted to reservoirs, including Sam Rayburn and Toledo Bend. The areas that have not been converted retain some resemblance to pre-settlement conditions. Fire is not a large driver in the Creek Bottomlands, hence fire suppression does not play a large role in shaping the forested communities.
Fire Regimes – Fire was a natural and important disturbance throughout the Western Gulf Plain. Fire occurred naturally and was started by Native Americans for game movement, insect control, travel, and many other reasons. Contrary to most of the region, the Creek Bottomland reference community developed with a very infrequent fire regime. The bottomlands are estimated to have burned once in every 20 to 50 years. Bottomlands naturally retard fire in a number of ways. Frequent flooding inundates the sites for periods, and fire cannot travel. Another reason for reduced fire intervals is the understory vegetation is somewhat sparse of fine-fuel materials compared to those in the uplands. Coupled with the thicker, fire-resistant leaves adorning much of the vegetation, the bottomlands do not burn very often.
Disturbance Regimes – Extreme weather events occur occasionally throughout the region. Tornados uproot trees and open canopies in the spring months. In the late summer and early fall, hurricanes or tropical depressions often make landfall, dumping excessive amounts of rain and toppling trees with high winds. Another cause of large canopy openings is the effects of the southern pine beetle (Dendroctonus frontalis). Since the Forest Service has been recording in the late 1950’s, beetle outbreaks have occurred every 6 to 9 years (although a major attack has not occurred in some time), usually when the trees are stressed because of multiple environmental factors.
State and Transition Diagram -
The following diagram suggests some pathways the vegetative communities may take. Other states may exist that are not shown on the diagram. The information is intended to show what might happen through different circumstances; it does not mean that this would happen the same way in every instance. Changes to the community within a state move back-and-forth easily, but as thresholds are crossed the site changes from state to state. Meaning, changes have progressed to the point where some form of energy is necessary to return the site to the previous state.
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
Ecosystem states
| T1A | - | Invasion by Chinese tallow |
|---|---|---|
| T1B | - | Clearcut, site preparation, tree planting |
| T1C | - | Clearcut, grass/crop planting |
| R2A | - | Removal of Chinese tallow, return over/understory to natives |
| T2A | - | Clearcut, site preparation, tree planting |
| T2B | - | Clearcut, grass/crop planting |
| R3A | - | Tree planting, return flooding intervals |
| T3A | - | Clearcut, abandonment, Chinese tallow invasion |
| T3B | - | Clearcut, grass/crop planting |
| R4A | - | Tree planting, return flooding intervals |
| T4A | - | Oldfield abandonment, Chinese tallow invasion |
| T4B | - | Clearcut, site preparation, tree planting |
State 1 submodel, plant communities
| 1.1A | - | Closer to stream and/or more frequent flooding |
|---|---|---|
| 1.2A | - | Further from stream and/or less frequent flooding |
State 2 submodel, plant communities
State 3 submodel, plant communities
State 4 submodel, plant communities
State 1
Forest
Two communities exist in the Forest State: the Water Oak/White Oak Forest Community (1.1) and the Stream Bank Community (1.2). The overall state has a high overstory canopy cover (75 to 95 percent) of hardwood species with some pine mixed in. Basal areas usually range from 80 to 100 square feet per acre, but can be as low as 60 and as high as 140 square feet per acre. The dominant overstory species are water oak, white oak, sweetgum (Liquidambar styracifllua), and loblolly pine. Flooding in State 1 is common varying from brief to very brief durations depending on micro-relief, amount of precipitation, and current saturation of the soil. Flooding can occur anytime, but typically occurs during the dormant-growing season (October to February).
Community 1.1
Water Oak/White Oak Forest
The Creek Bottomland Communities are highly based on proximity to the stream channel and micro-relief throughout the site. A subtle rise or fall of mere inches can drastically alter the vegetative composition. The Water Oak/White Oak community (1.1) represents the higher elevation sites, further away from the stream bank in comparison to community 1.2. Plant species occurring in the Water Oak/White Oak community vary from facultative to upland according to the U.S. Army Corps’ Wetland Delineation Manual (2010). Understory indicators include; Indian woodoats, longleaf woodoats (Chasmanthium sessiliflorum), partridgeberry, Carolina elephantsfoot (Elephantopus carolinianus), and American beautyberry (Callicarpa americana).
Table 5. Ground cover
| Tree foliar cover | 5-25% |
|---|---|
| Shrub/vine/liana foliar cover | 5-25% |
| Grass/grasslike foliar cover | 10-40% |
| Forb foliar cover | 3-20% |
| Non-vascular plants | 0% |
| Biological crusts | 0% |
| Litter | 5-50% |
| Surface fragments >0.25" and <=3" | 0% |
| Surface fragments >3" | 0% |
| Bedrock | 0% |
| Water | 0-25% |
| Bare ground | 5-25% |
Table 6. Canopy structure (% cover)
| Height Above Ground (m) | Tree | Shrub/Vine | Grass/ Grasslike |
Forb |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| <0.15 | 0-1% | 0-15% | 5-40% | 3-10% |
| >0.15 <= 0.3 | 5-30% | 3-20% | 5-35% | 3-10% |
| >0.3 <= 0.6 | 0-15% | 3-15% | 3-65% | 3-15% |
| >0.6 <= 1.4 | 0-5% | 0-5% | 3-35% | 0-3% |
| >1.4 <= 4 | 5-10% | 0-3% | 0-10% | – |
| >4 <= 12 | 5-35% | 0-5% | – | – |
| >12 <= 24 | 50-95% | 0-3% | – | – |
| >24 <= 37 | 15-50% | 0-1% | – | – |
| >37 | – | – | – | – |
Community 1.2
Stream Bank
Community 1.2, the Stream Bank Community, represents the closest community to the stream and lowest micro-relief in the reference state. Flooding is common, but brief, so the plants do not stay inundated with water for extremely long periods. Therefore, obligate plant species do exists, but more commonly facultative to facultative wet plants persist. These species are better able to handle anoxic conditions during prolonged submergence. Slender woodoats (Chasmanthium laxum), giant cane (Arundinaria gigantea), blunt broom sedge (Carex tribuloides), and King Solomon’s-seal (Polygonatum biflorum) are all common indicators of Community 1.2. Even though the communities are usually easily defined by distance from the stream bottom, both communities can occur within feet of each other as relief changes by the slightest amount. As the streams find new paths, old braided stream channels throughout the site can hold pockets water. Also, floodwaters scour and deposit new soil throughout the landscape. The activity of the water causes the soil to be highly variable through the delineation. Because of the soil variability, the sites should be viewed on a landscape level instead of small, individual plots (acres instead of square feet). Bare soil is seen in greater amounts than the adjacent uplands in the loamy stream bottomlands as floods remove excessive litter buildup. Communities within State 1 affected by a canopy-clearing disturbance (usually high winds) can be inhabited by light-seeded species. If advanced oak reproduction is present at time of disturbance the stand will retain its oak dominance. Oaks will sprout, grow, die-back, and regrow for many years. Otherwise, sweetgum will colonize the canopy because of their rapid growth and ability to grow into the crown early. If the advanced oak regeneration is not present, a sweetgum-dominated stand is possible. Fire plays a small role in the overall ecosystem. Prolonged drought and severe dry conditions could allow a fire to burn through the bottoms, but it was only estimated to occur once in every 10 to 20 years. More common is treefall because of windthrow. The rooting systems in the bottoms are oftentimes shallow. In combination with some mortality because of prolonged flooding, downed trees and upright snags in the Stream Bottomlands occur frequently.
Pathway 1.1A
Community 1.1 to 1.2
The drivers for the community shift are a closer proximity to the stream or more frequent flooding. As community 1.1 stays wetter, the vegetative species begin to resemble those of community 1.2. Species found in the Stream Bank Community are able to withstand anoxic conditions for longer periods of time. A shift may not occur for years, or even decades. Stream channels choose the least path of resistance and cut new paths through the soil. Old stream channels are commonly seen.
Pathway 1.2A
Community 1.2 to 1.1
The driver for the community shift is further distance to the stream or shorter flood duration. As Communities 1.2 stay drier for longer, their vegetative species are occupied by those in Community 1.1. Species found in the Water Oak/White Oak Forest Community (1.1) do not tolerate flooding as well as the other communities, thus the drier soil conditions assist in the establishment of plants in Community 1.1. A shift may not occur for years, or even decades. Stream channels choose the least path of resistance and cut new paths through the soil. Old stream channels are commonly seen.
State 2
Invasion
Chinese tallow (Triadica sebifera) is an undesired, invasive species brought to the United States in 1776 (Randall & Marinelli, 1996). Rapid expansion along the gulf coastal states has allowed the species to invade many ecosystems and consequently reduce diversity. Tallow trees are known to cause gastrointestinal upset, contact dermatitis, and toxicity in livestock and humans. Mechanical and chemicals options exist as a means to control the trees.
Community 2.1
Exotic Thicket
Chinese tallow invade the ecological site via flooding events as nearby waterways transport seeds. Once settled, the seeds produce saplings viable to reproduce seeds in as little as three years. The rapid establishment immediately blocks sunlight to understory species and reduces diversity. Unabated growth quickly allows the saplings to grow into the overstory, thus changing the ecological state entirely. Reductions in size and number of all vegetative species are seen in all canopy tiers.
Table 7. Ground cover
| Tree foliar cover | 10-25% |
|---|---|
| Shrub/vine/liana foliar cover | 0-5% |
| Grass/grasslike foliar cover | 0-5% |
| Forb foliar cover | 0-5% |
| Non-vascular plants | 0% |
| Biological crusts | 0% |
| Litter | 45-90% |
| Surface fragments >0.25" and <=3" | 0% |
| Surface fragments >3" | 0% |
| Bedrock | 0% |
| Water | 0% |
| Bare ground | 0-5% |
State 3
Plantation
The Plantation State is a result of conversion activities. The landowner has maximized silviculture production by planting a monoculture of tree species.
Community 3.1
Pine/Hardwood Plantation
In the immediate years following the initial plantation tree planting, the understory community will resemble State 1. During this early growth period, the landowner will typically remove unwanted hardwoods and herbaceous plants to reduce competition with the planted trees. As the overstory canopy closes, less understory management is required due to sunlight restrictions to the ground layer.
State 4
Pasture and Cropland
The Pasture and Cropland State is a result of conversion activities. The landowner has maximized agriculture production by planting a monoculture of introduced grass species or agricultural row crops.
Community 4.1
Planted Pasture and Row Crop
Typical introduced pasture grass species include bahiagrass (Paspalum notatum) and different varieties of bermudagrass (Cynodon dactylon). The grasses are grown for livestock production through direct grazing or baling hay for later use. Agricultural row crops are grown for food and fiber production. Many farmers use herbicides to reduce unwanted plant competition which yields a plant community unrepresentative of the reference (State 1) or subsequent vegetative states.
Transition T1A
State 1 to 2
The transition from the State 1 to State 2 is a result of occupancy by Chinese tallow. Chinese tallow invades oftentimes from upstream as their seeds are carried by floodwaters. Tallow trees grow and spread quickly throughout infected sites.
Transition T1B
State 1 to 3
The transition is because of the land manager maximizing silviculture potential. Merchantable timber is harvested by clearcut, then the site is prepared and planted to a monoculture of trees.
Transition T1C
State 1 to 4
The transition is because of the land manager converting to agricultural production. Merchantable timber is harvested by clearcut, then the site is prepared and planted to either a planted grass for grazing livestock or row crops for food and fiber.
Restoration pathway R2A
State 2 to 1
The driver for restoration is control of Chinese tallow. Although an option, mechanical removal of the trees is difficult because they readily regrow from roots and seeds. Several chemicals methods are available including glyphosate for cut-stump treatments, triclopyr for cut-stump and foliar treatments, imazamox for broad spectrum application, and imazapyr as a foliar spray. Many aquatic herbicides have water use restrictions and can potentially kill hardwoods, so labels and restrictions should be read carefully prior to application.
Transition T2A
State 2 to 3
The transition is because of the land manager maximizing silviculture potential. Merchantable timber is harvested by clearcut, then the site is prepared and planted to a monoculture of trees.
Transition T2B
State 2 to 4
The transition is because of the land manager converting to agricultural production. Merchantable timber is harvested by clearcut, then the site is prepared and planted to either a planted grass for grazing livestock or row crops for food and fiber.
Restoration pathway R3A
State 3 to 1
This restoration pathway may be accomplished by removing planted trees (pine or other hardwood) and replanting bottomland hardwoods. Restoration efforts for bottomland hardwood forests have proven difficult and much research has been done on these ecosystems. Many times restoring the function of the ecosystem is the most difficult obstacle. Evapotranspiration and hyrdoperiod are closely linked and may never fully be restored until a forested condition exists again (Stanturf et al., 2001). Local tree availability may limit the possibilities of species composition. Careful planning of available species, site design, and further management actions should be conversed with a knowledgeable restoration source. With this in mind, oftentimes late summer and early fall are the best times to begin because of possibly wet conditions during the late fall to early spring. Many detailed guides have been written to assist with restoration, and suggested readings include, “A Guide to Bottomland Hardwood Restoration” (Allen et al., 2001).
Transition T3A
State 3 to 2
This community transition is caused by neglecting the plantation understory. Without control, the understory becomes a dense thicket and can be invaded by Chinese tallow.
Transition T3B
State 3 to 4
The transition is because of the land manager maximizing agricultural production. Merchantable timber is harvested by clearcut, then the site is prepared and planted to either an improved grass or row crops.
Restoration pathway R4A
State 4 to 1
This restoration pathway may be accomplished by restoring bottomland hardwoods. Restoration efforts for bottomland hardwood forests have proven difficult and much research has been done on these ecosystems. Many times restoring the function of the ecosystem is the most difficult obstacle. Evapotranspiration and hyrdoperiod are closely linked and may never fully be restored until a forested condition exists again (Stanturf et al., 2001). Local tree availability may limit the possibilities of species composition. Careful planning of available species, site design, and further management actions should be conversed with a knowledgeable restoration source. With this in mind, oftentimes late summer and early fall are the best times to begin because of possibly wet conditions during the late fall to early spring. Many detailed guides have been written to assist with restoration, and suggested readings include, “A Guide to Bottomland Hardwood Restoration” (Allen et al., 2001).
Transition T4A
State 4 to 2
This community transition is caused by neglecting the pasture or not replanting crops. Without control, the understory becomes a dense thicket and can be invaded by Chinese Tallow.
Transition T4B
State 4 to 3
The transition is because of the land manager maximizing silviculture potential. The site is prepared and planted to a monoculture of trees.
Additional community tables
Table 8. Community 1.1 forest overstory composition
| Common name | Symbol | Scientific name | Nativity | Height (m) | Canopy cover (%) | Diameter (cm) | Basal area (square m/hectare) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Tree
|
|||||||
| water oak | QUNI | Quercus nigra | – | – | 35–75 | – | – |
| white oak | QUAL | Quercus alba | – | – | 35–75 | – | – |
| sweetgum | LIST2 | Liquidambar styraciflua | – | – | 35–75 | – | – |
| loblolly pine | PITA | Pinus taeda | – | – | 15–50 | – | – |
| American beech | FAGR | Fagus grandifolia | – | – | 15–35 | – | – |
| red maple | ACRU | Acer rubrum | – | – | 5–15 | – | – |
| southern red oak | QUFA | Quercus falcata | – | – | 1–10 | – | – |
| shortleaf pine | PIEC2 | Pinus echinata | – | – | 1–10 | – | – |
| southern magnolia | MAGR4 | Magnolia grandiflora | – | – | 1–5 | – | – |
| blackgum | NYSY | Nyssa sylvatica | – | – | 1–5 | – | – |
Table 9. Community 1.1 forest understory composition
| Common name | Symbol | Scientific name | Nativity | Height (m) | Canopy cover (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Grass/grass-like (Graminoids)
|
||||||
| longleaf woodoats | CHSE2 | Chasmanthium sessiliflorum | – | – | 5–40 | |
| variable panicgrass | DICO2 | Dichanthelium commutatum | – | – | 5–35 | |
| needleleaf rosette grass | DIAC | Dichanthelium aciculare | – | – | 0–5 | |
| Indian woodoats | CHLA5 | Chasmanthium latifolium | – | – | 0–5 | |
|
Forb/Herb
|
||||||
| partridgeberry | MIRE | Mitchella repens | – | – | 5–50 | |
| eastern poison ivy | TORA2 | Toxicodendron radicans | – | – | 5–25 | |
| hairy bedstraw | GAPI2 | Galium pilosum | – | – | 1–15 | |
| Carolina elephantsfoot | ELCA3 | Elephantopus carolinianus | – | – | 1–15 | |
| St. Andrew's cross | HYHY | Hypericum hypericoides | – | – | 1–10 | |
| Canadian blacksnakeroot | SACA15 | Sanicula canadensis | – | – | 0–10 | |
| Canada goldenrod | SOCA6 | Solidago canadensis | – | – | 0–10 | |
| mayapple | POPE | Podophyllum peltatum | – | – | 0–5 | |
| beechdrops | EPVI2 | Epifagus virginiana | – | – | 0–3 | |
| early blue violet | VIPA18 | Viola ×palmata | – | – | 0–1 | |
| Texas dutchman's pipe | ARRE3 | Aristolochia reticulata | – | – | 0–1 | |
|
Shrub/Subshrub
|
||||||
| American beautyberry | CAAM2 | Callicarpa americana | – | – | 5–25 | |
| two-wing silverbell | HADI3 | Halesia diptera | – | – | 5–15 | |
| southern arrowwood | VIDE | Viburnum dentatum | – | – | 1–10 | |
| American witchhazel | HAVI4 | Hamamelis virginiana | – | – | 1–10 | |
| yaupon | ILVO | Ilex vomitoria | – | – | 0–10 | |
| common sweetleaf | SYTI | Symplocos tinctoria | – | – | 0–5 | |
| farkleberry | VAAR | Vaccinium arboreum | – | – | 0–5 | |
| Carolina laurelcherry | PRCA | Prunus caroliniana | – | – | 0–5 | |
|
Tree
|
||||||
| red maple | ACRU | Acer rubrum | – | – | 5–15 | |
| sweetgum | LIST2 | Liquidambar styraciflua | – | – | 5–15 | |
| American hornbeam | CACA18 | Carpinus caroliniana | – | – | 1–10 | |
| water oak | QUNI | Quercus nigra | – | – | 1–5 | |
| winged elm | ULAL | Ulmus alata | – | – | 1–5 | |
| red mulberry | MORU2 | Morus rubra | – | – | 1–5 | |
| white oak | QUAL | Quercus alba | – | – | 1–5 | |
| flowering dogwood | COFL2 | Cornus florida | – | – | 0–3 | |
| hophornbeam | OSVI | Ostrya virginiana | – | – | 0–3 | |
| American beech | FAGR | Fagus grandifolia | – | – | 0–1 | |
|
Vine/Liana
|
||||||
| muscadine | VIRO3 | Vitis rotundifolia | – | – | 1–5 | |
| Virginia creeper | PAQU2 | Parthenocissus quinquefolia | – | – | 1–5 | |
| cat greenbrier | SMGL | Smilax glauca | – | – | 1–5 | |
| roundleaf greenbrier | SMRO | Smilax rotundifolia | – | – | 1–5 | |
| lanceleaf greenbrier | SMSM | Smilax smallii | – | – | 1–5 | |
| evening trumpetflower | GESE | Gelsemium sempervirens | – | – | 1–5 | |
| crossvine | BICA | Bignonia capreolata | – | – | 1–5 | |
Table 10. Community 1.2 forest understory composition
| Common name | Symbol | Scientific name | Nativity | Height (m) | Canopy cover (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Grass/grass-like (Graminoids)
|
||||||
| slender woodoats | CHLA6 | Chasmanthium laxum | – | – | 5–40 | |
| giant cane | ARGI | Arundinaria gigantea | – | – | 1–20 | |
| blunt broom sedge | CATR7 | Carex tribuloides | – | – | 1–15 | |
| greater bladder sedge | CAIN12 | Carex intumescens | – | – | 1–10 | |
| leathery rush | JUCO4 | Juncus coriaceus | – | – | 1–3 | |
|
Forb/Herb
|
||||||
| partridgeberry | MIRE | Mitchella repens | – | – | 5–25 | |
| eastern poison ivy | TORA2 | Toxicodendron radicans | – | – | 5–20 | |
| smooth Solomon's seal | POBI2 | Polygonatum biflorum | – | – | 5–20 | |
| smallspike false nettle | BOCY | Boehmeria cylindrica | – | – | 1–10 | |
| St. Andrew's cross | HYHY | Hypericum hypericoides | – | – | 1–10 | |
| looseflower water-willow | JUOV | Justicia ovata | – | – | 0–10 | |
| beechdrops | EPVI2 | Epifagus virginiana | – | – | 0–3 | |
| Missouri violet | VIMI3 | Viola missouriensis | – | – | 0–1 | |
| Jack in the pulpit | ARTR | Arisaema triphyllum | – | – | 0–1 | |
|
Fern/fern ally
|
||||||
| common ladyfern | ATFI | Athyrium filix-femina | – | – | 0–5 | |
|
Shrub/Subshrub
|
||||||
| American beautyberry | CAAM2 | Callicarpa americana | – | – | 5–25 | |
| two-wing silverbell | HADI3 | Halesia diptera | – | – | 5–15 | |
| southern arrowwood | VIDE | Viburnum dentatum | – | – | 1–10 | |
| American witchhazel | HAVI4 | Hamamelis virginiana | – | – | 1–10 | |
| common sweetleaf | SYTI | Symplocos tinctoria | – | – | 0–5 | |
| farkleberry | VAAR | Vaccinium arboreum | – | – | 0–5 | |
| Carolina laurelcherry | PRCA | Prunus caroliniana | – | – | 0–5 | |
|
Tree
|
||||||
| red maple | ACRU | Acer rubrum | – | – | 5–15 | |
| sweetgum | LIST2 | Liquidambar styraciflua | – | – | 5–15 | |
| American hornbeam | CACA18 | Carpinus caroliniana | – | – | 1–10 | |
| American holly | ILOP | Ilex opaca | – | – | 1–10 | |
| Alabama supplejack | BESC | Berchemia scandens | – | – | 0–5 | |
| green ash | FRPE | Fraxinus pennsylvanica | – | – | 0–5 | |
| water oak | QUNI | Quercus nigra | – | – | 1–5 | |
| loblolly pine | PITA | Pinus taeda | – | – | 1–5 | |
| southern magnolia | MAGR4 | Magnolia grandiflora | – | – | 0–1 | |
| blackgum | NYSY | Nyssa sylvatica | – | – | 0–1 | |
|
Vine/Liana
|
||||||
| crossvine | BICA | Bignonia capreolata | – | – | 1–5 | |
| Virginia creeper | PAQU2 | Parthenocissus quinquefolia | – | – | 1–5 | |
| cat greenbrier | SMGL | Smilax glauca | – | – | 1–5 | |
| roundleaf greenbrier | SMRO | Smilax rotundifolia | – | – | 1–5 | |
| lanceleaf greenbrier | SMSM | Smilax smallii | – | – | 1–5 | |
| evening trumpetflower | GESE | Gelsemium sempervirens | – | – | 1–5 | |
| muscadine | VIRO3 | Vitis rotundifolia | – | – | 1–5 | |
|
Nonvascular
|
||||||
| sphagnum | SPHAG2 | Sphagnum | – | – | 0–3 | |
Interpretations
Animal community
The historic animal community is relatively similar to the community in the natural state. One major missing component is the black bear. Black bears were highly prevalent across the Western Coastal Plain. Their reduced numbers are directly correlated with the westward expansion of the European settlers. Like other mobile animals in the area, bears would have used multiple ecological sites. The Creek Bottomlands would have provided the bears with nutrition/food in the form of soft and hard mast (American beautyberries and acorns). Other apex predators like the mountain lion and wolf have disappeared in a similar manner.
The Creek Bottomlands contain a high diversity of animal species. Mature oaks drop acorns in the fall that are eaten by a myriad of species from bird to mammal. Woodpeckers are especially common throughout, as well as songbirds.
White-tailed deer are highly adaptable herbivores and use the bottomlands in combinations with other nearby ecological sites. They consume browse from shrubs and small trees, soft mast, hard mast, including the occasional forb. The hardwood ecosystem is typically denser than the surrounding uplands so deer, and other secretive species, use the bottomlands as a travel corridor.
Healthy bottomlands provide wild turkeys with almost all habitat needs from nesting to foraging. Adult and juvenile turkeys are opportunistic omnivores and use a variety of food items including animal matter, hard and soft mast, green forage, tubers, seeds, and grains, while poults require high protein foods such as insects and young vegetation.
Waterfowl use of the Creek Bottomlands varies by year depending on flood conditions. When the system is flooded, waterfowl take advantage of acorns as a high energy food source. Waterfowl can also be seen feeding on the numerous aquatic invertebrates found in flooded areas. Contrary to migrating waterfowl, wood ducks and hooded mergansers are present year round, so large-natural cavities, and those created by pileated woodpeckers, in dead trees are important.
Other common species that utilize the ecosystem include squirrels and woodcock. Squirrels utilize the hard mast species present, while woodcock probe the moist soil for invertebrates.
Recreational uses
The most popular recreational use is hunting for white-tail deer and other game animals. Bird watching is also becoming increasingly popular.
Wood products
Pines are used for all types of wood products. Hardwoods are suitable for use as pulpwood, firewood, charcoal, lumber, furniture, railroad ties and pallet material.
Supporting information
Inventory data references
These site descriptions were developed as part a Provisional Ecological Site project using historic soil survey manuscripts, available site descriptions, and low intensity field traverse sampling. Future work to validate the information is needed. This will include field activities to collect low, medium, and high-intensity sampling, soil correlations, and analysis of that data. A final field review, peer review, quality control, and quality assurance review of the will be needed to produce the final document.
Type locality
| Location 1: Nacogdoches County, TX | |
|---|---|
| Latitude | 31° 29′ 31″ |
| Longitude | 94° 46′ 37″ |
Other references
Ajilvsgi, G. 2003. Wildflowers of Texas. Revised edition. Shearer Publishing, Fredericksburg, TX.
Ajilvsgi, G. 1979. Wildflowers of the Big Thicket. Texas A&M University Press, College Station, TX.
Allen, J. A., B. D. Keeland, J. A. Stanturf, and A. F. Kennedy Jr. 2001. A guide to bottomland hardwood restoration. Technical report, USGS/BRD/ITR-2000-0011.
Bray, W. L. 1904. Forest resources of Texas. Bureau of Forestry Bulletin 47, Government Printing Office, Washington D.C.
Diggs, G. M., B. L. Lipscomb, M. D. Reed, and R. J. O’Kennon. 2006. Illustrated flora of East Texas. Second edition. Botanical Research Institute of Texas & Austin College, Fort Worth, TX.
Jones, S. D., J. K. Wipff, and P. M. Montgomery. 1997. Vascular plants of Texas: a comprehensive checklist including synonymy, bibliography, and index. University of Texas Press, Austin.
NatureServe. 2002. International classification of ecological communities: Terrestrial vegetation of the United States. National forests in Texas final report. NatureServe, Arlington, VA.
Nixon, E. S. 2000. Trees, shrubs & woody vines of East Texas. Second edition. Bruce Lyndon Cunningham Productions, Nacogdoches, TX.
Picket, S. T. and P. S. White. 1985. The ecology of natural disturbance and patch dynamics. Academic Press, Orlando, FL.
Randall, J. M., and J. Marinelli. 1996. Invasive plants: weeds of the global garden. Volume 149. Brooklyn Botanic Garden, Brooklyn, NY.
Roberts, O. M. 1881. A description of Texas, its advantages and resources with some account of their development past, present and future. Gilbert Book Company, Saint Louis, MO.
Soil Survey Staff, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture. Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO) Database.
Stanturf, J. A., S. H. Schoenholtz, C. J. Schweitzer, and J. P. Shepard. 2001. Achieving restoration success: Myths in bottomland hardwood forests. Restoration Ecology, 9:189-200.
Stringham, T. K., W. C. Krueger, and P. L. Shaver. 2003. State and transition modeling: An ecological process approach. Journal of Range Management 56:106-113.
Truett, J. C. 1984. Land of bears and honey: A natural history of East Texas. The University of Texas Press, Austin, TX.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2010. Regional supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region (Version 2.0). U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Engineer Research and Development Center, Environmental Laboratory ERDC/EL TR-10-20.
USDA-NRCS Ag Handbook 296 (2006).
Van Kley, J. E., R. L. Turner, L. S. Smith, and R. E. Evans. 2007. Ecological classification system for the national forests and adjacent areas of the West Gulf Coastal Plain. Second approximation. Stephen F. Austin University and The Nature Conservancy, Nacogdoches, TX.
Vines, R. A. 1960. Trees, shrubs, and woody vines of the Southwest. University of Texas Press, Austin, TX.
Watson, G. E. 2006. Big Thicket Plant Ecology. Third Edition. University of North Texas Press, Denton, TX.
Contributors
Tyson Hart
Approval
Bryan Christensen, 12/13/2023
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 | 09/03/2021 |
| Approved by | Bryan Christensen |
| 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
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.
Ecosystem states
| T1A | - | Invasion by Chinese tallow |
|---|---|---|
| T1B | - | Clearcut, site preparation, tree planting |
| T1C | - | Clearcut, grass/crop planting |
| R2A | - | Removal of Chinese tallow, return over/understory to natives |
| T2A | - | Clearcut, site preparation, tree planting |
| T2B | - | Clearcut, grass/crop planting |
| R3A | - | Tree planting, return flooding intervals |
| T3A | - | Clearcut, abandonment, Chinese tallow invasion |
| T3B | - | Clearcut, grass/crop planting |
| R4A | - | Tree planting, return flooding intervals |
| T4A | - | Oldfield abandonment, Chinese tallow invasion |
| T4B | - | Clearcut, site preparation, tree planting |
State 1 submodel, plant communities
| 1.1A | - | Closer to stream and/or more frequent flooding |
|---|---|---|
| 1.2A | - | Further from stream and/or less frequent flooding |