Natural Resources
Conservation Service

Ecological site F152BY010TX

Terrace

Last updated: 9/22/2023
Accessed: 12/24/2024

Home / Esd catalog / MLRA 152B / Ecological site F152BY010TX

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.

Click to explore map

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): 152B–Western Gulf Coast Flatwoods

Major Land Resource Area (MLRA) 152B, Western Gulf Coast Flatwoods, is in eastern Texas and western Louisiana. Locally termed the Flatwoods, the area is dominated by coniferous forest covering 5,681 square miles (14,714 square kilometers). The region is a hugely diverse transition zone between the northern and eastern mixed forests and southern and western coastal prairies and grasslands.

Classification relationships

Major Land Resource Area (MLRA) (USDA-Natural Resources Conservation Service, 2006)

Ecological site concept

The Terrace ecological site has very deep soils on terrace landforms. These sites are located on a higher landform than bottomlands and are not as wet. The sites are situated on a lower landform than the uplands and are not as dry. The sites do not flood or pond, but instead have a water table from December to April. This unique position between the drier uplands and wetter bottomlands creates their plant community.

Associated sites

F152BY001TX	Depressional Soils are poorly drained and on a lower landscape position.
F152BY006TX	Well Drained Loamy Upland Soils are loamy, well-drained, and on a higher landform.
F152BY007TX	Poorly Drained Loamy Upland Soils are poorly drained and loamy throughout.
F152BY008TX	Acid Baygall Soils have a spodic horizon.
F152BY009TX	Sandy Terrace Soils are sandy throughout.
F152BY011TX	Swamp Soils are on a lower landform and ponded for long durations.
F152BY014TX	Poorly Drained Clayey Bottomland Soils are on a lower landform and flooded for extended periods.

Similar sites

F152BY006TX	Well Drained Loamy Upland Soils are well drained and on a higher landform.
F152BY009TX	Sandy Terrace Soils are sandy throughout.

F152BY006TX

Well Drained Loamy Upland

Soils are well drained and on a higher landform.

F152BY009TX

Sandy Terrace

Soils are sandy throughout.

Table 1. Dominant plant species

Tree	(1) Pinus taeda (2) Quercus alba
Shrub	(1) Cornus florida (2) Ilex vomitoria
Herbaceous	(1) Schizachyrium scoparium

Download full description

Physiographic features

The ecological site includes areas on terraces. Slope ranges from 0 to 5 percent, but are predominantly 1 to 3 percent. Elevation ranges from 15 to 151 feet. Water table depth fluctuates throughout the year. From December to May, the depth to the top of the water table will be from 12 to 63 inches. The water table will deepen during the warmer months of the year.

Table 2. Representative physiographic features

Landforms	(1) Coastal plain > Terrace
Runoff class	Low to negligible
Flooding frequency	None
Ponding frequency	None
Elevation	5 – 46 m
Slope	0 – 5%
Water table depth	30 – 160 cm
Aspect	Aspect is not a significant factor

Climatic features

The Western Gulf Coast Flatwoods (MLRA 152B) is within the humid subtropical climate zone. The region boasts one of the highest rainfall averages in the southern United States, over 60 inches (152 centimeters) annually. This is due to the gulf currents that carry humid air to the region, where it condenses and precipitates. Rainfall averages are fairly consistent month by month, ranging from the lowest of 3.5 inches (8.9 centimeters) in March and the highest of 5.6 inches (14.3 centimeters) in June.

The area is prone to severe thunderstorms and tornadoes when the proper conditions exist, generally in the springtime. Sometimes excessive rainfall occurs, leading to flooding. Hurricanes also strike the region, generally in late summer or early fall. These extreme weather events can be quite destructive, toppling trees, and serves to naturally reset the vegetation to primary succession. The higher humidity of the region amplifies the feeling of heat during the summer. Prolonged droughts and snowfall events are rare.

Table 3. Representative climatic features

Frost-free period (average)	249 days
Freeze-free period (average)	289 days
Precipitation total (average)	1,600 mm

Bar

Line

Figure 2. Monthly precipitation range

Bar

Line

Figure 3. Monthly average minimum and maximum temperature

Figure 4. Annual precipitation pattern

Figure 5. Annual average temperature pattern

Climate stations used

(1) ELIZABETH [USC00162800], Oakdale, LA
(2) LUMBERTON [USC00415435], Silsbee, TX
(3) DE QUINCY [USC00162361], Dequincy, LA
(4) OBERLIN FIRE TWR [USC00166938], Oberlin, LA
(5) LIBERTY [USC00415196], Liberty, TX
(6) TOWN BLUFF DAM [USC00419101], Jasper, TX
(7) DE RIDDER [USC00162367], Deridder, LA
(8) CLEVELAND [USC00411810], Cleveland, TX
(9) ORANGE 9 N [USC00416680], Orange, TX
(10) WILDWOOD [USC00419754], Kountze, TX

Influencing water features

While no ponding or flooding occurs, the soils within the ecological site have a seasonally high water table from December to May.

Wetland description

The soils associated with this site are non-hydric. Some sites are in complex with depressions that are hydric. Some sites have small areas that are hydric. These small areas are depressions or low lying flats that remain wet for long periods. Onsite investigation is needed to determine the local conditions.

Soil features

The soils consist of very deep, moderatlely well drained to well drained soils formed from alluvium. The representative soils are Belrose, Kenefick, Spurger, and Votaw. They are widely varying taxonomically, from entisols to alfisols to ultisols. Their unifying factor is their terrace position. They are on lower landscape positions than uplands and on higher landscape positions than bottomlands.

Table 4. Representative soil features

Parent material	(1) Alluvium – igneous, metamorphic and sedimentary rock
Surface texture	(1) Loamy fine sand (2) Fine sandy loam (3) Silt loam
Family particle size	(1) Fine-loamy (2) Coarse-loamy
Drainage class	Moderately well drained to well drained
Permeability class	Moderately rapid to slow
Soil depth	203 cm
Surface fragment cover <=3"	0%
Surface fragment cover >3"	0%
Available water capacity (0-152.4cm)	15.24 – 20.32 cm
Calcium carbonate equivalent (0-152.4cm)	0%
Electrical conductivity (0-152.4cm)	0 – 1 mmhos/cm
Sodium adsorption ratio (0-152.4cm)	0 – 2
Soil reaction (1:1 water) (0-152.4cm)	4.5 – 6.5
Subsurface fragment volume <=3" (25.4-152.4cm)	0 – 2%
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 – In southeastern Texas and southwestern Louisiana the transition from coastal grasslands to the large expanse of coniferous forest has been deemed the “Flatwoods”. As the name suggests, the region is relatively flat and, with many transitional areas, highly diverse in flora and fauna. Historically, the area was covered by pines with mixed hardwoods, sparse shrubs, and a diverse understory of grasses and forbs. Fire and drainage patterns play a significant role in shaping the plant communities and their development. Fire suppression, drainage alterations, and land conversion have reduced the amount of historical communities in existence today.

Background – Prior to settlement by the Europeans, the reference state for the Terraces were Loblolly Pine/White Oak Woodlands. Remnants of this presumed historic plant community still exist where natural conditions are intact. 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. The age of this woodland community varies, and has a diverse flora.

Settlement Management – As human settlement increased throughout the area, so did the increase in logging and grazing by domestic livestock. 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. As more people colonized they began suppressing fire, which allowed dense thickets of shrubs to replace the herbaceous understory.

Current Management and State – Today much of the historic forest is gone, replaced by pine plantations, crops, and pastures. The areas that were not converted have been fire-suppressed so long that loblolly pine and fire intolerant hardwoods populate the overstory structure. Currently, federally-managed properties are the best place to view the remnant sites (National Park Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, etc.). Some private individuals have begun restoring communities through selective tree planting and retention of communities that remain. Other restoration efforts include mimicking natural-disturbance regimes through gap-phase regeneration on plantation sites.

Fire Regimes – Fire was a natural and important disturbance throughout the region. Fire occurred naturally from lightning strikes, by Native Americans for game movement, and eventually early European settlers. Fires throughout the Flatwoods occurred at two different times. Early in the year, they would occur during late winter and early spring, removing senescent vegetation, recycling nutrients and minerals, and spurring new plant growth. Late summer and early fall fires occurred as well, but with a different community effect. Summer fires burned hotter and with more intensity, greatly suppressing the shrub canopy layer. The summer fires also shifted the ecological site transitional state by decreasing grass densities and increasing forb densities. The topography, fuel loads, and other conditions caused patchy burns throughout the region resulting in mosaic patterns of plant communities and a heterogeneous landscape.

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 can 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). Starting 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 due to multiple environmental factors.

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	-	Absence of disturbance, coupled with natural regeneration over time
T1B	-	Merchantable timber is harvested by clearcut and site is planted to a monoculture of pine trees
T1C	-	Removal of native vegetation and introduction of improved forage species or annual crops
R2A	-	Reduction of overstory canopy using fire and selective thinning
T2A	-	Merchantable timber is harvested by clearcut and site is planted to a monoculture of pine trees
T2B	-	Merchantable timber harvested by clearcut, followed by planting of improved forage species or annual crops
R3A	-	Selective harvest combined with reintroduction of natural disturbances and native species
T3A	-	Lack of natural/anthropogenic disturbance and natural regeneration over time
T3B	-	Timber harvest by clearcut, followed by planting improved forage species or annual crops
T4A	-	Lack of natural/anthropogenic disturbance and natural regeneration over time
T4B	-	Site is planted to a monoculture of pine trees

State 1
Reference

The Terrace ecological site is a Loblolly Pine/White Oak Woodland. The terrace position is a mixture of both adjacent upland and bottomland sites. The terrace position is not as dry as the uplands, nor as wet as the bottomlands. The soils adequately provide moisture to the plants and the soils provide a good growing medium. The overstory canopy is moderate, from 60 to 80 percent. Basal areas are similar, from 85 to 105 square feet per acre. A moderate fire interval exists between 5 to 10 years. The sites midstory and understory fluctuate in biomass at time since last fire. More grasses and forbs will dominate immediately afterwards and slowly progress into more shrubs until the next fire.

Community 1.1
Loblolly Pine/White Oak Woodland

The overstory canopy is dominated by loblolly pine with intermingled white oak (Quercus alba). Other species commonly found mixed in the overstory are longleaf pine (Pinus palustris), sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua), and water oak (Quercus nigra). The midstory shrub and tree species can be thick or sparse, depending on time since last fire. American beautyberry (Callicarpa americana) and yaupon (Ilex vomitoria) can be extremely dense as the length since last fire increases. Flowering dogwood (Cornus florida) is a conspicuous indicator species, especially late March through early May when blooming. The herbaceous understory is dense and filled with little bluestem (Schizachyrium scoparium), needleleaf rosettegrass (Dichanthelium aciculare), and western brackenfern (Pteridium aquilinum). Summer grapes (Vitis aestivalis) are also very common throughout the site.

State 2
Encroached

A long-term lack of fire and management has caused the community to cross a threshold, resulting in an Encroached State (2). The crossing of this threshold represents a closure in the overstory canopy, which limits the productivity of the ground layer. The limited ground layer does not provide enough fuel to harbor a burn with the intensity found in State 1. Fire-intolerant hardwoods have become part of the overstory. The overstory trees are overstocked and limit the growth of neighboring species. The overstocking reduces tree growth and causes stress, making them vulnerable to attacks from insects and/or diseases. The plant communities will stay in this constant state and continue to age without disturbance or intervention.

Community 2.1
Pine/Hardwood Forest

The understory plant layer only contains remnants of the reference community and possibly no reference community indicator species. Shade-tolerant grasses, such as longleaf woodoats (Chasmanthium sessiliflorum), forbs, and greenbriers (Smilax sp.) may be the only ground-layer species. Because the site lacks the diversity of the reference state, the wildlife diversity will be limited to generalist species, species requiring a closed canopy, and those seeking refuge.

State 3
Plantation

The Plantation State is a result of conversion activities. The landowner has maximized silviculture production by planting a monoculture of pine species, usually loblolly pine, but sometimes slash pine (Pinus ellioti) is planted.

Community 3.1
Plantation

In the immediate years following the initial plantation tree planting, the understory community will resemble the reference state (State 1). During this early growth period, the landowner will typically remove unwanted hardwoods and herbaceous plants to reduce competition with the planted pine trees. As the overstory canopy closes, less understory management is required due to sunlight restrictions to the ground layer.

State 4
Converted

The Converted state is the result Pasture or Cropping 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 State 1 to the State 2 is a result of time and long periods (greater than 10 years) of no fire and/or forest management practices. Without fire to suppress tree seedlings, biomass and diversity is lost from the grass and forb layers of the system.

Transition T1B
State 1 to 3

The transition is due to the land manager maximizing silviculture potential. Merchantable timber is harvested by clearcut. Then, the site is prepared and planted to a monoculture of pine trees.

Transition T1C
State 1 to 4

The transition is due to 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 R2A
State 2 to 1

Restoration of this community to the reference state begins with a selective timber harvest. Removing unwanted trees opens up the canopy, allowing sunlight penetration to the ground. Years of overstory growth have limited the fuel necessary to have an effective fire. Time will be needed to encourage understory growth. Once the herbaceous layer has established, more frequent than natural burns (1 to 2 years) may be required to suppress the woody vegetation.

Transition T2A
State 2 to 3

The transition is due to the land manager maximizing silviculture potential. Merchantable timber is harvested by clearcut. Then, the site is prepared and planted to a monoculture of pine trees.

Transition T2B
State 2 to 4

The transition is due to the land manager maximizing agricultural potential. Merchantable timber is harvested by clearcut. Then, the site is prepared and planted to either an improved grass or row crops.

Restoration pathway R3A
State 3 to 1

When restoring a plantation, the land manager can either clearcut the timber, prepare the site, and plant trees. Otherwise, gap-phase regeneration is possible through selective timber harvests. This involves replanting the desired overstory species in small openings within the current structure of the woodland. The benefit is a slow progression of restoration instead of starting from primary succession.

Transition T3A
State 3 to 2

This community transition is caused by neglecting the plantation understory. Without fire, mowing, or herbicides, unwanted understory saplings can begin to grow into the overstory.

Transition T3B
State 3 to 4

Transition T4A
State 4 to 2

This community transition is caused by neglecting crop or pasture. Without continuation of agricultural management first-successional herbaceous plants will occupy the ground layer, followed by shrubs, and eventually shade-loving, fire-intolerant overstory species.

Transition T4B
State 4 to 3

The transition is due to the land manager maximizing silviculture production. The site prepared and planted to a monoculture of pine or hardwood trees.

Additional community tables

Table 5. Community 1.1 forest overstory composition

Common name	Symbol	Scientific name	Nativity	Height (m)	Canopy cover (%)	Diameter (cm)	Basal area (square m/hectare)
Tree
sweetgum	LIST2	Liquidambar styraciflua	Native	–	–	–	–
longleaf pine	PIPA2	Pinus palustris	Native	–	–	–	–
loblolly pine	PITA	Pinus taeda	Native	–	–	–	–
white oak	QUAL	Quercus alba	Native	–	–	–	–
water oak	QUNI	Quercus nigra	Native	–	–	–	–

Table 6. 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	Native	–	–
needleleaf rosette grass	DIAC	Dichanthelium aciculare	Native	–	–
little bluestem	SCSC	Schizachyrium scoparium	Native	–	–
Forb/Herb
partridge pea	CHFA2	Chamaecrista fasciculata	Native	–	–
Fern/fern ally
western brackenfern	PTAQ	Pteridium aquilinum	Native	–	–
Shrub/Subshrub
American beautyberry	CAAM2	Callicarpa americana	Native	–	–
yaupon	ILVO	Ilex vomitoria	Native	–	–
flowering dogwood	COFL2	Cornus florida	Native	–	–
Tree
red maple	ACRU	Acer rubrum	Native	–	–
American holly	ILOP	Ilex opaca	Native	–	–
Vine/Liana
roundleaf greenbrier	SMRO	Smilax rotundifolia	Native	–	–
summer grape	VIAE	Vitis aestivalis	Native	–	–

Interpretations

Wood products

These soils occur in the Woodland Suitability Groups 1w8 and 2w8. They have a very high potential for woodland management both, pine and hardwood. The 50-year site index for loblolly pine ranges from 95 to 105 feet (approximately 57 to 72 feet on a 25-year curve). The yield from an unmanaged, natural stand of loblolly pine, over a 50-year period, is approximately 330 to 460 board feet (Doyle Rule), 2.64 to 3.68 tons, or 90 to 115 cubic feet per acre per year. Management can substantially increase this yield. Access and equipment operability on these soils is fair during wet periods. Harvesting and other operations may need to be suspended during such periods, but this should cause no difficulty in long range operations. Wetness will also cause some slight problems on these soils for log landings and roads. Raising and crowning the road surface may be necessary. Some problems with rutting may occur during wet periods. Site preparation operations should be limited to the dry months and planting should be planned for the drier part of the planting season. The use of herbicides for site preparation should take into consideration the slow drainage on these soils. Applications should be not be made during wet periods.

Supporting information

Inventory data references

This site description was developed as part of the provisional ecological site initiative using historic soil survey manuscripts, available range site descriptions, and low intensity field sampling.

Type locality

Location 1: Newton County, TX
UTM zone	N
UTM northing	30.6382444
UTM easting	-93.814216
General legal description	E.O. Siecke State Forest

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.
Liu, C., P. A. Harcombe, and I. S. Elsik. 1990. Fire study report, including Roy E. Larsen Preserve species list. Summer 1990. Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Rice University, Houston, TX.
Marks, P. L., and P. A. Harcombe. 1981. Forest Vegetation of the Big Thicket, southeast Texas. Ecological Monographs 51:287-305.
Matos, J. A. 1985. Roy E. Larsen Sandylands Sanctuary vascular plant species list. Master thesis, Stephen F. Austin University, Nacogdoches, TX.
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.
Randall, J. M., and J. Marinelli. 1996. Invasive plants: weeds of the global garden. Volume 149. Brooklyn Botanic Garden, Brooklyn, NY.
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.
Soil Survey Staff, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture. Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO) Database.
Truett, J. C. 1984. Land of bears and honey: A natural history of East Texas. The University of Texas Press, Austin, TX.
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.
USDA-NRCS Ag Handbook 296 (2006).
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, 9/22/2023

Acknowledgments

Thanks to all involved during the preparation, sampling, and reviewing of the Flatwoods project. Thanks to Josh Berry, Dennis Brezina, Kenny Hall, Jason Hohlt, Stacey Kloesel, Ricky Lambert, Cody Langston, Mark Moseley, Ramiro Molina, Mike Oliver, Alan Peer, Sara Russell, Don Sabo, Mary Webb-Marek, and Jon Wiedenfeld for all their help.

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	09/21/2021
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:

Download reference sheet

Click on box and path labels to scroll to the respective text.

Ecosystem states

T1A	-	Absence of disturbance, coupled with natural regeneration over time
T1B	-	Merchantable timber is harvested by clearcut and site is planted to a monoculture of pine trees
T1C	-	Removal of native vegetation and introduction of improved forage species or annual crops
R2A	-	Reduction of overstory canopy using fire and selective thinning
T2A	-	Merchantable timber is harvested by clearcut and site is planted to a monoculture of pine trees
T2B	-	Merchantable timber harvested by clearcut, followed by planting of improved forage species or annual crops
R3A	-	Selective harvest combined with reintroduction of natural disturbances and native species
T3A	-	Lack of natural/anthropogenic disturbance and natural regeneration over time
T3B	-	Timber harvest by clearcut, followed by planting improved forage species or annual crops
T4A	-	Lack of natural/anthropogenic disturbance and natural regeneration over time
T4B	-	Site is planted to a monoculture of pine trees

State 1 submodel, plant communities

1.1. Loblolly Pine/White Oak Woodland

State 2 submodel, plant communities

2.1. Pine/Hardwood Forest

State 3 submodel, plant communities

3.1. Plantation

State 4 submodel, plant communities

4.1. Planted Pasture and Row Crop

Search

Natural ResourcesConservation Service

Ecological site F152BY010TX

Terrace

Last updated: 9/22/2023 Accessed: 12/24/2024

General information

Figure 1. Mapped extent

MLRA notes

Classification relationships

Ecological site concept

Associated sites

Similar sites

Table 1. Dominant plant species

Ecosystem states

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: 9/22/2023
Accessed: 12/24/2024