a!
3%....
mm .

Mammy
.n 4m;
3

0 x:

it, It 2.,
. £1925...

E

.. i...

n 2

E 3.

Ana...

3..

I...
z in.“

all}

14N.0nufifimfi
1‘ .u ‘ k.
I )l‘ .

I. ‘ .k
zvmhfip $Mfi» 3
an. .fi. .fifiafih 5mm
C», M 54ng
5.31;; , . a .n

.11 , [nun
(«1.2

.23.: ‘ .x I
g"... Li
.fiwm?

.
l

a. 3...!
zit 5
I

. .. v.5...
,13241 s. .1...
2.3u131-k011‘31u3

. .t .n

‘1

 

This is to certify that the
thesis entitled

A Riverine Riparian Delineation Model for Forest Types in
Northern Lower Michigan

presented by

Colleen Alicia Trese

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for the

M. S. degree in Fisheries and Wildlife
Major Professor’s Signature

// WAX 2,00 5

 

Date

MSU is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution

LIBRARIES
MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
EAST LANSING, MICH 48824—1048

PLACE IN RETURN Box to remove this checkout from your record.
10 AVOID FINES return on or before date due.
MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested.

 

DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2/05 clelFIC/DateDuejnddpJS

 

A RIVERINE RIPARIAN DELINEATION MODEL FOR FOREST TYPES IN
NORTHERN LOWER MICHIGAN

By

Colleen Alicia Trese

A THESIS
Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of
MASTER OF SCIENCE
Department of Fisheries and Wildlife

2005

ABSTRACT

A RIVERINE RIPARIAN DELINEATION MODEL FOR FOREST TYPES IN
NORTHERN LOWER MICHIGAN

By

Colleen Alicia Trese

Disturbances to riparian areas can impair their ability to provide many
unique and important ecological functions. The goal of this study was to describe
the riparian and upland communities of 3 Ecological Land Units (ELU) in northern
Lower Michigan and to develop a riparian/upland delineation model to provide a
method by which managers can identify the riparian/upland border and relate
these communities to categories useful for management interpretations.
Sampling of vegetation, bird, reptile, amphibian, and small mammal communities
were conducted along transects placed perpendicular to the stream. The
riverine-to-upland gradient was delineated into riparian and upland ecological
zones based on the extent of herbaceous plants adapted to wet soils as an
indicator of environmental factors that affect community development. The
riparian/upland delineation model was developed through stepwise discriminant
analysis. This study shows that riparian areas support higher vegetation species
diversity, high biomass, and habitat for many unique species in comparison to
surrounding uplands. The 3 models developed for each ELU allow managers to
simply and quickly determine the variable width of the ecological riparian zone

within a site.

In memory of my mother, Laone Anne Trese, an exceptional mother, lifelong
student, teacher, humanitarian, and naturalist, who inspired a passion for
learning in all her children. She was an inspiration to all who knew her.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Acknowledgements to Michigan State University and Michigan
Department of Natural Resources, Fisheries Division for project funding. In
acknowledgement and appreciation to my committee members, Kelly F.
Millenbah, Henry Campa, III, and Richard Kobe. A special thanks to Mark Teply,
of Larix Systems, for his statistical guidance. Thanks to Matt Gates for all of his
hard work and assistance during data collection and species identification, and
mostly importantly, for his friendship. Thanks also to the hard work of all my

interns.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................ vii
LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................. xiv
INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 1
OBJECTIVES ....................................................................................................... 6
STUDY AREA ...................................................................................................... 7
METHODS ........................................................................................................... 9
Site Selection .................................................................................................... 9
Sampling Design ............................................................................................. 11
Vegetation ....................................................................................................... 12
Herbaceous vegetation ............................................................................... 13
Small woody species ................................................................................... 14
Large woody species .................................................................................. 14
Snags and dead and down woody material ................................................. 14
Percent canopy cover ................................................................................. 15
Avifauna .......................................................................................................... 1 5
Herpetofauna .................................................................................................. 16
Small Mammals .............................................................................................. 17
Analysis Methods ............................................................................................ 17
Community Delineation ............................................................................... 18
Model Development .................................................................................... 1 9
RESULTS ........................................................................................................... 21
ELU Community Composition ......................................................................... 21
Vegetation Community ................................................................................ 21
Vertebrate Community ................................................................................ 32
Community Delineation ................................................................................... 37
RIU Community Composition .......................................................................... 44
Vegetation community ................................................................................. 44
JP-ELU .................................................................................................... 44
RM-ELU ................................................................................................... 54
SM-ELU ................................................................................................... 66
Vertebrate Community ................................................................................ 76
JP-ELU .................................................................................................... 77
RM-ELU ................................................................................................... 78
SM-ELU ................................................................................................... 80
Model Development ........................................................................................ 81
JP—ELU ........................................................................................................ 83

RM-ELU ...................................................................................................... 87

SM-ELU ....................................................................................................... 91
DISCUSSION ..................................................................................................... 96
MANAGEMENT RECOMENDATIONS ............................................................ 102
APPENDICES .................................................................................................. 104
LITERATURE CITED ....................................................................................... 148

vi

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Herbaceous species presence/no detection across all ELUs, JP-ELU,
RM-ELU, and SM-ELU, in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001. ........... 22

Table 2. Small tree (diameter <10 cm) and shrub species presence/no detection
across all ELUs, JP-ELU, RM-ELU, and SM-ELU, in northern Lower
Michigan, 2000-2001. .............................................................................. 29

Table 3. Tree species (DBH >10 cm) presence/no detection across all ELUs, JP-
ELU, RM-ELU, and SM-ELU, in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001. .. 31

Table 4. Average percent cover (standard error in parentheses) of herbaceous
species (graminoid and forb cover combined), woody understory (<2 m in
height) canopy and woody overstory (>2 m in height) canopy in each ELU,
in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001. ................................................. 32

Table 5. Avian species presence/no detection across all ELUs, JP-ELU, RM-
ELU, and SM-ELU, in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001. .................. 33

Table 6. Herpetofauna species presence/no detection across all ELUs, JP-ELU,
RM-ELU, and SM-ELU, in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001. ........... 36

Table 7. Small mammal species presence/no detection across all ELUs, JP-
ELU, RM-ELU, and SM-ELU, in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001. .. 37

Table 8. Descriptive statistics for wetland indicator status (WIS) variables within
each ELU, JP-ELU, RM-ELU, and SM-ELU, in northern Lower Michigan,
2000-2001. .............................................................................................. 42

Table 9. Percent wetland indicator status (WIS) grouping rules for each ELU, JP-
ELU, RM-ELU, and SM-ELU, in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001. .. 43

Table 10. Examples of transect riparian (R) and upland (U) zone delineations for
ELUs in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001 ........................................ 43

Table 11. Comparison of percent herbaceous wetland indicator status (WIS)
between riparian (R) and upland (U) ecological zones of JP-ELU sites, in
northern Lower Michigan, 2000 and 2001. .............................................. 45

Table 12. Herbaceous species constancy of occurrence (percent of plots with

species present) within riparian (R) and upland (U) ecological zones of JP-
ELU sites, in northern Lower Michigan, 2000 and 2001. ......................... 47

vii

Table 13. Small woody (diameter <10 cm) species constancy of occurrence
within riparian (R) and upland (U) ecological zones of JP-ELU sites, in
northern Lower Michigan, 2000 and 2001. .............................................. 51

Table 14. Large woody (DBH >10 cm) species constancy of occurrence within
riparian (R) and upland (U) ecological zones of JP-ELU sites, in northern
Lower Michigan, 2000 and 2001 .............................................................. 52

Table 15. Comparison of the number of herbaceous species per vegetation plot
and average percent cover variable means between riparian (R) and
upland (U) ecological zones of JP-ELU sites, in northern Lower Michigan,
2000 and 2001 ......................................................................................... 53

Table 16. Comparison of small woody (diameter <10 cm), tree (DBH >10 cm),
and coarse woody debrislsnaglstump variables between riparian (R) and
upland (U) ecological zones of JP-ELU sites, in northern Lower Michigan,
2000 and 2001 ......................................................................................... 54

Table 17. Comparison of percent herbaceous wetland indicator status (WIS)
between riparian (R) and upland (U) ecological zones of RM-ELU sites, in
northern Lower Michigan, 2000 and 2001. .............................................. 55

Table 18. Herbaceous species constancy of occurrence within riparian (R) and
upland (U) ecological zones of RM-ELU sites, in northern Lower Michigan,
2000 and 2001 ......................................................................................... 57

Table 19. Small woody (diameter <10 cm) species constancy of occurrence
within riparian (R) and upland (U) ecological zones of RM-ELU sites, in
northern Lower Michigan, 2000 and 2001. .............................................. 62

Table 20. Large woody (DBH >10 cm) species constancy of occurrence within
riparian (R) and upland (U) ecological zones of RM-ELU sites, in northern
Lower Michigan, 2000 and 2001 .............................................................. 64

Table 21. Comparison of the number of herbaceous species per vegetation plot
and average percent cover variable means between riparian (R) and
upland (U) ecological zones for RM-ELU sites, in northern Lower
Michigan, 2000 and 2001. ....................................................................... 65

Table 22. Comparison of small woody (diameter <10 cm), tree (DBH >10 cm),
and coarse woody debrislsnaglstump variables between riparian (R) and
upland (U) ecological zones for RM-ELU sites, in northern Lower
Michigan, 2000 and 2001. ....................................................................... 66

viii

Table 23. Comparison of percent herbaceous wetland indicator status (WIS)
between riparian (R) and upland (U) ecological zones of SM-ELU sites, in
northern Lower Michigan, 2000 and 2001. .............................................. 67

Table 24. Herbaceous species constancy of occurrence within riparian (R) and
upland (U) ecological zones of SM-ELU sites, in northern Lower Michigan,
2000 and 2001 ......................................................................................... 68

Table 25. Small woody (diameter <10 cm) species constancy of occurrence
within riparian (R) and upland (U) ecological zones of SM-ELU sites, in
northern Lower Michigan, 2000 and 2001. .............................................. 73

Table 26. Large woody (DBH >10 cm) species constancy of occurrence within
riparian (R) and upland (U) ecological zones of SM-ELU sites, in northern
Lower Michigan, 2000 and 2001 .............................................................. 74

Table 27. Comparison of the number of herbaceous species per vegetation plot
and average percent cover variable means between riparian (R) and
upland (U) ecological zones of SM-ELU sites, in northern Lower Michigan,
2000 and 2001 ......................................................................................... 75

Table 28. Comparison of small woody (diameter <10 cm), tree (DBH >10 cm),
and coarse woody debrislsnaglstump variables between riparian (R) and
upland (U) ecological zones of SM-ELU sites, in northern Lower Michigan,
2000 and 2001 ......................................................................................... 76

Table 29. Total number of herpetofauna species individuals (number per plot in
parentheses), and total number of species observed within riparian (R)
and upland (U) zones of JP-ELU sites, in northern Lower Michigan, 2000
and 2001 .................................................................................................. 77

Table 30. Total number of small mammal species individuals (number per trap
night in parentheses), and total number of species observed within
riparian (R) and upland (U) zones of JP-ELU sites, in northern Lower
Michigan, 2000 and 2001. ....................................................................... 78

Table 31. Total number of herpetofauna species individuals (number per plot in
parentheses), and total number of species observed within riparian (R)
and upland (U) zones of RM-ELU sites, in northern Lower Michigan, 2000
and 2001 .................................................................................................. 79

Table 32. Total number of small mammal species individuals (number per trap
night in parentheses), and total number of species observed within
riparian (R) and upland (U) zones of RM-ELU sites, in northern Lower
Michigan, 2000 and 2001. ....................................................................... 79

Table 33. Total number of herpetofauna species individuals (number per plot in
parentheses), and total number of species observed within riparian (R)
and upland (U) zones of SM-ELU sites, in northern Lower Michigan, 2000
and 2001 .................................................................................................. 80

Table 34. Total number of small mammal species individuals (number per trap
night in parentheses), and total number of species observed within
riparian (R) and upland (U) zones of SM-ELU sites, in northern Lower
Michigan, 2000 and 2001. ....................................................................... 81

Table 35. Chi-square test for significance of canonical roots for JP-ELU data,
from sites in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001. ................................. 83

Table 36. Canonical factor loadings for the dependant variables of each
canonical root of the JP-ELU data from sites in northern Lower Michigan,
2000-2001. The variable that is most strongly correlated with each of the
first 6 significant roots is highlighted. ....................................................... 84

Table 37. Tests of significance of the discriminatory power for the classification
model for the JP-ELU data from sites in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-
2001 ......................................................................................................... 85

Table 38. Discriminant function coefficients for the classification model
developed at step 3 of discriminant analysis for the JP-ELU data from
sites in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001. ......................................... 86

Table 39. Classification matrix (predicted classifications in columns) for the
classification model developed at step 3 of discriminant analysis for the
JP-ELU data from sites in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001 ............. 87

Table 40. Chi-square test for significance of canonical roots with successive
roots removed for RM-ELU data, from sites in northern Lower Michigan,
2000-2001. .............................................................................................. 88

Table 41. Canonical factor loadings for each significant canonical root for the
dependant variables of the RM-ELU data from sites in northern Lower
Michigan, 2000-2001. The variable that is most strongly correlated with
each of the first 6 significant roots is highlighted. .................................... 88

Table 42. Tests of significance of the discriminatory power for the classification
model for the RM-ELU data from sites in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-
2001 ......................................................................................................... 89

Table 43. Discriminant function coefficients for the classification model
developed at step 3 of discriminant analysis for the RM-ELU data from
sites in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001. ......................................... 90

Table 44. Classification Matrix (predicted classifications in columns) for the
classification model developed at step 3 of discriminant analysis for the
RM-ELU data from sites in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001. .......... 91

Table 45. Chi-square test for significance of canonical roots with successive
roots removed for SM-ELU data, from sites in northern Lower Michigan,
2000-2001. .............................................................................................. 91

Table 46. Canonical factor loadings for each significant canonical root for the
dependant variables of the SM-ELU data from sites in northern Lower
Michigan, 2000-2001. The variable that is most strongly correlated with
each of the first 6 significant roots is highlighted. .................................... 92

Table 47. Tests of significance of the discriminatory power for the classification
model for the SM-ELU data from sites in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-
2001 ......................................................................................................... 93

Table 48. Discriminant function coefficients for the classification model
developed at step 3 of discriminant analysis for the SM-ELU data from
sites in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001. ......................................... 94

Table 49. Classification Matrix (predicted classifications in columns) for the
classification model developed at step 3 of discriminant analysis for the
SM-ELU data from sites in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001. .......... 95

Table A-1. A list of all herbaceous species which occurred within vegetation
sampling plots in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001. Species are
identified to genus or genus species, wetland indicator status (WIS), and
life form. All information, including species code and currently accepted
scientific and common names, taken from The PLANTS Database (USDA,
NRCS 2004). ......................................................................................... 106

Table A-2. A list of all tree and shrub species which occurred within vegetation
sampling plots in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001. Species are
identified to genus or genus species, wetland indicator status (WIS), and
life form. All Information, including species code and currently accepted
scientific and common names, taken from The PLANTS Database (USDA,
NRCS 2004). ......................................................................................... 113

Table B-1. Herbaceous species constancy of occurrence (percent of plots with
species present) in JP-ELU sites in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001.
.............................................................................................................. 116

Table B-2. Herbaceous species constancy of occurrence (percent of plots with

species present) in RM-ELU sites in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001.
.............................................................................................................. 120

xi

Table B-3. Herbaceous species constancy of occurrence (percent of plots with
species present) in SM-ELU sites in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001.
.............................................................................................................. 125

Table B-4. Small tree (diameter <10 cm) and shrub species constancy of
occurrence (percent of plots with species present) in JP-ELU sites in
northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001. ................................................... 130

Table B-5. Small tree (diameter <10 cm) and shrub species constancy of
occurrence (percent of plots with species present) in RM-ELU sites in
northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001. ................................................... 131

Table B-6. Small tree (diameter <10 cm) and shrub species constancy of
occurrence (percent of plots with species present) in SM-ELU sites in
northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001. ................................................... 133

Table B-7. Tree (DBH >10 cm) species constancy of occurrence (percent of
plots with species present) in JP-ELU sites in northern Lower Michigan,
2000-2001 . ............................................................................................ 1 35

Table 38 Tree (DBH >10 cm) species constancy of occurrence (percent of
plots with species present) in RM-ELU sites in northern Lower Michigan,
2000-2001 . ............................................................................................ 1 35

Table B—9. Tree (DBH >10 cm) species constancy of occurrence (percent of
plots with species present) in SM-ELU sites in northern Lower Michigan,
2000-2001. ............................................................................................ 136

Table 8-10. Average percent cover of herbaceous species (graminoid and forb
cover combined), woody understory (height <2 m) canopy and woody
overstory (height >2 m) canopy in each site in northern Lower Michigan,
2000-2001 . ............................................................................................ 1 37

Table 0-1. Avian species and number of individuals heard/seen per survey in
JP-ELU sites in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001 ........................... 139

Table 0-2. Avian species and number of individuals heard/seen per survey in
RM-ELU sites in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001. ........................ 141

Table C-3. Avian species and number of individuals heard/seen per survey in
SM-ELU sites in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001 .......................... 143

Table 0-4. Total number of herpetofauna species occurrences (numbers in
parentheses are incidental sightings) in JP-ELU sites during herpetofauna
cover board searches and area constrained transect searches in northern
Lower Michigan, 2000-2001. ................................................................. 145

xii

Table 0-5. Total number of herpetofauna species occurrences (numbers in
parentheses are incidental sightings) in RM-ELU sites during
herpetofauna cover board searches and area constrained transect
searches in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001. ................................ 145

Table 0-6. Total number of herpetofauna species occurrences (numbers in
parentheses are incidental sightings) in SM-ELU sites during herpetofauna
cover board searches and area constrained transect searches in northern
Lower Michigan, 2000-2001. ................................................................. 145

Table 0-7. Total number individuals of small mammal species trapped per trap
night in JP-ELU sites in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001. ............. 146

Table 0-8. Total number individuals of small mammal species trapped per trap
night in RM-ELU sites in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001. ............ 146

Table C-9. Total number individuals of small mammal species trapped per trap
night in SM—ELU sites in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001. ............ 147

xiii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Location of the study area in the northern lower peninsula of Michigan.
.................................................................................................................. 8

Figure 2. Wildlife (small mammal, avian, herpetofauna) and vegetation sampling
locations along 5 transects arranged in each study site, in northern Lower
Michigan. ................................................................................................. 12

Figure 3. Nested plot design for vegetation plots placed every 35 m along 5
transects arranged in each study site in northern Lower Michigan. ......... 13

Figure 4. Histogram of percent wetland indicator status (WIS) obligate wetland
(OBL) within SM-ELU, in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001. ............. 40

Figure 5. Histogram of percent wetland indicator status (WIS) obligate upland
(UPL) within SM-ELU, in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001. ............. 41

Figure 6. Box and whisker plot of percent herbaceous wetland indicator status
(WIS) for ripan‘an (R) and upland (U) ecological zones of JP-ELU sites, in
northern Lower Michigan, 2000 and 2001. .............................................. 45

Figure 7. Box and whisker plot of percent herbaceous wetland indicator status
(WIS) for riparian (R) and upland (U) ecological zones of RM-ELU sites, in
northern Lower Michigan, 2000 and 2001. .............................................. 55

Figure 8. Box and whisker plot of percent herbaceous wetland indicator status

(WIS) for riparian (R) and upland (U) ecological zones of SM-ELU sites, in
northern Lower Michigan, 2000 and 2001. .............................................. 67

xiv

INTRODUCTION

Riparian areas are dynamic systems that function as the interaction
between terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems. Riparian ecosystems are defined by
Manci (1989) as “landscapes adjacent to drainage ways and floodplains that
exhibit vegetation, soil, and hydrologic mosaics along topographic and moisture
gradients that are distinct from the predominant landscape surface types.”
Although riparian areas make up only a minor portion of the overall area of a
landscape, they are generally the most productive in terms of biodiversity and
total biomass (Hunter 1990). They supply food, cover, and water for a diversity
of animals (both upland and wetland species), and serve as migration routes and
forest connectors between habitats for a variety of wildlife. Riparian areas are
important in terms of biodiversity as one-third of the country’s endangered or
threatened species occur in riparian and wetland habitats (Hansen et al. 1995).
Riparian areas also support diverse vegetation and high biomass. The variable
soil and hydrologic conditions support a variety of plant species as distinctly
wetland vegetation is often mixed with elements of upland vegetation (Oliver and
Hinckley 1987). Species diversity is affected by periodic flooding by its
differential destruction of vegetation, changing of substrate characteristics, and
by transportation of propagules (Bendix and Hupp 2000). Riparian areas are
high in primary productivity as the water content of the soil promotes litter
decomposition that leads to faster mineral cycling rates (Mikkelsen and Vesho

2000)

Riparian ecosystems have many unique and important ecological
functions. These include sediment filtering, erosion control, streambank
stabilization, water storage, flood control, and water quality improvement. The
physical structure of riparian vegetation accumulates sediment from surface
runoff and dissipates rainwater’s erosive potential, decreasing the sediment
introduced into streams (Mikkelsen and Vesho 2000). The nutrient uptake of
riparian vegetation filters out nutrients from nonpoint source pollution to improve
water quality (Hansen et al. 1995).

Disturbances to riparian areas can impair their ability to provide these vital
functions, and because they are relatively small and occur in conjunction with
waterways, they are especially vulnerable to alteration. Some natural
perturbations that impact riparian areas are fire, windthrow and beavers. Some
anthropogenic activities that disturb riparian systems are timber harvest, the
creation of dams, roads and homes, and recreational use. In addition, stream
dredging and slurry disposal for fisheries or water management may cause
small-scale disturbance in the nearby riparian zones.

The Michigan Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) Fisheries
Division constructs sediment traps within streambeds to collect sediment carried
by the current. Sand traps themselves are rid of accumulating sand by periodic
redredging. The spoils produced when cleaning a sand trap are commonly
transported to the nearby forest, spread onto the soil and seeded to grass. The
MDNR cleans sand traps once every 5 — 10 years, depending on the need (S.

Sendek, MDNR, pers. commun.) To minimize the effect of dumping sand from

dredging, which potentially disturbs riparian ecosystems, the MDNR Fisheries
Division partnered with Michigan State University (MSU) to investigate the
ecological characteristics that occur within the riparian to upland gradient along
streams. Different ecological communities within this gradient most likely
respond differently to disturbances, such as dredge slurry disposal.
Understanding community attributes, such as plant and animal species
occurrence, may provide base line data that helps managers determine areas
more appropriate for disturbance, and to better recognize community changes
due to small-scale disturbances. One of the main objectives of this study was to
delineate the ecological communities within the riparian to upland gradient.
Distinct riparian plant communities differentially occur in a gradient
perpendicular to the streambed in response to varying environmental factors
(Lamb and Mallik 2003, Decocq 2002, Bendix and Hupp 2000, Menges and
Waller 1983, and Frye and Quinn 1979). Riparian areas, as connectors between
upland and aquatic ecosystems, are a mosaic of sharp gradients of
environmental conditions, ecological processes and biotic communities. Flood
frequency, soil substrate size, soil saturation and elevation can change quickly,
within meters, as distances increase from the riverbed. Menges and Waller
(1983) classified riparian herbaceous species into plant strategy guilds; each
guild occurring at different optimal elevation levels. Tall competitive perennial
forbs dominated higher elevations (>60 cm elevation). The density of smaller
perennial forbs and tall annuals increased with increasing flooding frequency

(related to elevation levels). Areas with the greatest flooding frequency were

dominated by slow growing, stress tolerant grasses and sedges, and fast-
maturing ruderal annual forbs. Frye and Quinn (1979) found significant
differences in woody species composition above and below an elevation of 3.35
m above sea level in response to abrupt changes in soil texture, soil chemical
characteristics, and depth to water table. Tree species distributions have been
related to flood frequency (Bell 1974) and fluvial landforms (Hupp and Osterkamp
1985). Complete inundation may be a major factor in determining species
distributions as it exerts a selective pressure on the survival of species of higher
plants (Brink 1954) and seedlings of bottomland tree species (McDermott 1954,
Hosner 1958). Robertson et al. (1978) concluded that a single factor could not
explain the complexity of factors affecting species distributions, but indicated
distributions are effected by a site-inundation, soil drainage-aeration complex.
Pabst and Spies (1998) suggest that 5 major factors drive the distribution of
herbaceous and shrub communities in riparian zones of coastal Oregon; hillslope
processes and associated moisture gradient, hydrological disturbances,
tolerance to saturated soils, shade tolerance, and mineral soil distribution.

The gradients of distinct riparian vegetation communities, occurring in
close proximity, do not occur because of changes in one environmental factor but
in response to changes in the many unique characteristics and functions that
support them. Changes in riparian vegetation communities are more dramatic
than changes that occur in nearby upland ecosystems (Pabst and Spies 1998).

These unique attributes of streamside forest suggest that they need specific

management strategies, separate from those for nearby upland and aquatic
ecosystems.

The purpose of this project was to investigate the ecological
characteristics within the riverine-to-upland gradient of 3 predominant northern
Michigan ecological land units (ELUs). The cause and effect of the riparian
gradient is not the focus of this study. The goal of this study is to describe the
communities that occur within the gradient and to provide a method by which
managers can identify a community and its properties at a given area. This
information will allow managers to make better informed decisions on areas best

suited for a given disturbance or management regime.

OBJECTIVES

Specific objectives of this study were to:

1.

Determine the structure and composition of plant, bird, small mammal,
reptile and amphibian communities in 3 ELUs in northern Lower Michigan,
Classify and describe the separate ecological zones within the riverine—to-

upland gradient based on vegetation characteristics for the 3 ELUs,

. Describe the structure and composition of the plant and vertebrate

communities (avian, small mammal, reptile and amphibian) in relation to
the previously classified ecological zones within the riverine-to-upland
gradient,

Compare the ability of different vegetation parameters to discriminate
among the classified ecological zones,

Derive an empirical model that can be used to discriminate between the
ecological zones of the riverine-to—upland gradient in future sites candidate
for managed disturbance regimes, and

Make recommendations to MDNR Fisheries Division biologist for which
stream associated areas may be best suited for future disturbance

activities.

STUDY AREA

The assessment of ecological characteristics of a stream’s riverine to
upland ecosystem gradient was conducted in the northern lower peninsula of
Michigan, in Antrim, Cheboygan, Crawford, Emmet, Kalkaska, Montmorency, and
Otsego Counties (Figure 1). Sites occur on the Maple River, Black River, Pigeon
River, and Sturgeon River in the Cheboygan River Basin; the Jordan River in the
Jordan River Basin; the Manistee River in the Manistee River Basin; and the
Middle Branch Au Sable River and South Branch Au Sable River in the Au Sable
River Basin. The study area falls within sub-subsections Vll.2.2, Vll.2.3 and
Vll.6.1 of Albert’s (1995) ecosystem classification. These areas are composed
mainly of steep Vanderbilt moraine ridges surrounded by Grayling outwash plains
and channels. The soils are mostly sand or sands mixed with gravel.
Excessively drained soils occur on the outwash plains with well-drained sands on
the steep slopes (Albert 1995). Present dominant forest types are most often
jack pine (Pinus banksiana) barrens, northern hardwood forest of sugar maple
(Acer saccharum) - beech (Fagus grandifolia), early succession quaking aspen
(Populus tremuloides) stands, red pine (Pinus resinosa) - oak forest and northern

white cedar (Thuja occidentalis) swamps (Albert 1995).

Cheboygan
Otsego

Montmorency

/ craWIOId
I

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Kalkaska 4

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

/ Jl

Figure 1. Location of the study area in the northern lower peninsula of Michigan.

 

 

Average yearly temperature in the 7 county area ranges from 5-10° C, and
average yearly inches of precipitation occur in the low 308. Average growing
degree-days per year (the cumulative degrees that the daily mean temperature is
above 50° F) are near 2,000 (Alfred et al. 1973, Larson and Buchanan 1978,
Werlein 1998). Much of the areas climate is tempered by the effects of the Great
Lakes, which causes the winter to be milder and the summers to be cooler than

comparable areas of temperate latitude.

METHODS
Site Selection

Study sites to be monitored for ecological conditions were chosen based
on 3 criteria. In sequential order of consideration, the criteria were upland
vegetation type, stream characteristics and the potential for future disturbance by
MDNR management personnel.

Upland vegetation of sites fell within 1 of 3 ELUs. ELUs are determined
by both habitat type (potential vegetation) and forest type (current vegetation).
Habitat type, or inherent potential climax vegetation, is determined by factors
such as topography, soils, and depth of water. Habitat type classification uses
both understory and tree species climax composition as integrated indicators of
environmental factors that effect vegetation. Understory vegetation progresses
towards mature communities after disturbance much faster than the tree layer
(Burger and Kotar 2003) and certain understory species require more narrow
environmental conditions. Therefore, to classify a forest to habitat type, the
understory composition is a strong indicator of potential climax communities and
a mature tree canopy community need not be present. Forest type, or current
vegetation, is dependant on the successional sere occurring on the site and the
current successional plant community. There is often more than one sere within
a habitat type capable of producing the same climax vegetation. Therefore,
different forest types may occur within a habitat type depending on past

disturbance and management regimes.

The 3 habitat types included in the study are based on Burger and Kotars
(2003) classification system for northern Lower Michigan. These 3 habitat types,
representing site potential vegetation, are very dry/very poor nutrient PVCd
(white pine l blueberry — reindeer lichen), mesic to wet-mesic/poor nutrient
PArVCo (white pine — red maple l blueberry — bunchberry) and mesic/medium to
rich nutrient AFO/AFO-phase (sugar maple — American beech I sweet cicely)
(Burger and Kotar 2003). Forest type was determined using MIRIS land use
information, stand maps, and discussions with fisheries and wildlife biologist
familiar with the area. Based on both habitat type and forest type, study sites are
representative of one of 3 designated ELUs (habitat type/forest type): Jack Pine
ELU (PVCd/jack pine-red pine); Red Maple (Acer rubrum) ELU (ParVCo/red
maple-aspen); or Sugar Maple ELU (AFOlsugar maple-basswood [Tilia
Americanal). Hereafter, these ELUs will be referred to as JP-ELU, RM-ELU, and
SM-ELU, respectively.

The JP-ELU, with a dominant overstory of jack pine and red pine, is an
early successional stage to the climax forest of white pine and red pine of the
PVCd habitat type. The jack pine/red pine successional stage is currently the
dominantly occurring successional stage in northern lower Michigan and will
persist when periodic fires occur that maintain a suitable jack pine seed bed and
limit competition (Burger and Kotar 2003). The RM-ELU, with a dominant
overstory of red maple and quaking aspen, is a mid-successional stage to the
climax forest of white pine and red maple of the ParVCo habitat type. This red

maple and quaking spen successional stage is a commonly occurring cover type

10

in the area. Without disturbance, aspen and red oak occurance will decrease
while white pine will become dominant with red maple as a common associate
(Burger and Kotar 2003). The SM-ELU, with red maple and basswood dominant
in the overstory, is mid-succesional to the climax forest of sugar
maple/beechlbasswood in the AFOIAFO-phase habitat type. The most
commonly occurring successional stage within this habitat type in northern lower
Michigan is the climax forest (Burger and Kotar 2003).

Since Burger and Kotar's (2003) habitat typing was not developed to
describe riparian areas, sites were visited to ensure that similar riparian
vegetation community types exist among replicates within an ELU. After fulfilling
the ELU criteria, sites were chosen that occur along streams with similar
characteristics of size and basin structure. Finally, sites with potential for future
disturbance by MDNR management personnel were given highest priority. Five
replicates of each of the 3 ELUs are represented in the study design, resulting in
15 study sites.

Sampling Design

VWthin each study site, 5 permanently established transects were placed
perpendicular to the stream. Transects were spaced 100 m apart and traversed
from the river’s edge, to and through the adjacent upland stand (Figure 2). The
transects form the basis for sampling the vegetation attributes and wildlife
communities. The start and end point of each transect was spatially referenced

using a Global Positioning System (GPS).

11

 

 

    

 

. .flfl.U.11D.Il.U.[L.U.U.

Stream

   

   
 

  

 

I: Vegetation Plots

Small Mammal Traps and Herpetofauna (coverboard) Sampling
0 Avian Census Points

0

- - - - - - - - Herpetofauna (area constrained) Sampling
Figure 2. Vtfildlife (small mammal, avian, herpetofauna) and vegetation sampling

locations along 5 transects arranged in each study site, in northern Lower
Michigan.

Vegetation

On each transect, vegetation sample points were placed every 35 m
(beginning at the edge of the stream and moving outwards; Figure 2).
Vegetation attributes were measured in replicated nested plots at each sampling
point (Figure 3). All vegetation attributes were sampled once in each stand,
during July — August, 2000 and 2001. Nested plots were arranged so that the
long edge of the plot ran parallel to the stream to describe the ecological

variability associated with the riparian and upland areas.

12

 

 

 

2x10m

|1x1m

Figure 3. Nested plot design for vegetation plots placed every 35 m along 5
transects arranged in each study site in northern Lower Michigan.

 

 

 

 

Herbaceous vegetation

Herbaceous vegetation was determined at all sampling points along each
transect (Figure 2). Herbaceous vegetation structure and composition was
determined in each of the smallest nested plots (1 x 1 m; 4 per sampling point;
Figure 3). All plants occurring within the plot were identified to genus and to
species when possible. The dominant herbaceous species present within each
plot were noted. Graminoid cover (grasses, sedges, rushes), forb cover, bare
ground, and total cover were assessed within each 1 x 1 m plot (scale of 0 -

100%).

13

Small woody species

Small woody species were assessed at every second sampling point
(every 70 m) along each transect (Figure 2). Individual small woody plants
(diameter < 10 cm) were identified to Genus and to Species when possible, in
each of the 2 x 10 m nested plots (2 per sampling point; Figure 3). All individuals
of each species were assigned to a stem diameter class (e.g., 0 — 1.3 cm, 1.3 —
2.5 cm, and 2.5 — 5.1 cm using a diameter at breast height [DBH] tape) and
height strata (< 1 m or > 1 m). Within each unique combination of diameter and
height strata, the number of individuals was determined and the percent cover
estimated and assigned to one of 4 categories (0 — 25, 26 — 50, 51 - 75, and 76
— 100 %).
Large woody species

Large woody species were assessed at every second sampling point
(every 70 m) along each transect (Figure 2). Large woody species (DBH > 10
cm) were identified to species and tallied within the entire 5 x 20 m plot (Figure 3)
and DBH recorded for each individual.
Snags and dead and down woody material

Snags and dead and down woody material were assessed at every
second sampling point (every 70 m) along each transect (Figure 2). Snags (DBH
> 10 cm; smallest snag size required for a cavity nester in Michigan, e.g., black-
capped Chickadee [Parus atricapillus]; Schroeder 1983), stumps (diameter > 10
cm) and coarse woody debris (down and dead woody material; diameter > 10

cm) were measured within the entire 5 x 20 m plot (Figure 3). DBH or diameter

14

of snags and stumps were measured with a DBH tape or biltmore stick (Higgins
et al. 1994). This along with length of coarse woody debris (mentioned below)
allowed for calculations of volume. Height of snags was measured to the nearest
meter using a hypsometer (Hays et al. 1981). Height of stumps and length of
coarse woody debris were measured using a measurement tape.
Percent canopy cover

Percent cover of the entire vegetation community (stratified by herbaceous
species, woody understory canopy (< 2 m in height) and woody overstory canopy
(> 2 m in height)), was measured using the line intercept method (Canfield 1941)
along one 20 m transect within each 5 x 20 m plot (Figure 3). The vegetation
cover in each strata was determined by the proportion of the line transect
covered by vegetation (i.e., number of cm covered within 20 m).
Avifauna

Avian community composition and the relative abundance of avian
species were surveyed using 10-min point counts (Scott and Ramsey 1981) from
sunrise to 3 hours after sunrise. Ten-minute point counts were used because
Scott and Ramsey (1981) documented that during 32-minute point survey
periods 80% of the species detected were recorded within the initial 10 — 12
minutes.

Sampling points were placed at 150 m intervals along transects 1, 3 and
5; beginning at the stream’s edge and moving outward (Figure 2). Six sites (2
replicates per ELU) were surveyed twice in 2000 and once in 2001. The

remaining 9 sites (3 replicates per ELU) were surveyed once in 2001 only.

15

Because bird species respond differently to environmental conditions, surveys
were not conducted on mornings with extreme fog, steady drizzle, prolonged
rain, extreme temperature deviations, or winds > 20 kph (Robbins 1981).
Raptors tend to have relatively large home ranges, are secretive, occur at fairly
low densities (Fuller and Mosher 1981 ), and are not typically observed during the
types of surveys described, therefore, all incidental observations of raptors during
field sampling were recorded.
Herpetofauna

Amphibian and reptile species composition and relative abundance were
sampled using area constrained transect searches (Heyer et al. 1994) and cover
boards (Anderson and Ohmart 1986). Two main transects (interior transects 2
and 4) were selected for area constrained searches (Figure 2). Each main
transect (offset 1 m from the transect) was searched in its entirety at a width of 2
m within 48 hours after rainfall. All herpetofauna found were identified,
associated to a map location and the microhabitat described. The number of
coarse woody debris objects searched under for herpetofauna was also tallied.
Cover boards were placed 5 m from every second vegetation sampling plot on
each transect (Figure 2) to also obtain information on herpetofauna abundance
and occurrence. Cover boards (20.3 cm wide by 91.4 cm long by 2.5 m thick,
untreated pine) were placed at each sampling point at least 1 month before the
first sampling period. Seven sites were surveyed for herpetofauna by both

methods once during July — September, 2000 and once during May -- August,

16

2001. The remaining 8 sites were surveyed by both methods once during May -
August, 2001.
Small Mammals

Small mammal species composition and relative abundance was
determined by using large Sherman live-traps (Sherman aluminum folding live-
traps, Forestry Suppliers, lnc., Jackson, Mississippi) during consecutive 5-night
trapping periods. Trapping stations were established at every second vegetation
sampling plot (off set 1 m from the vegetation plot) on each transect with 2 traps
per station and covered with vegetation to minimize heat stress to animals in
traps. Traps were baited with rolled oats and anise extract and checked and set
each morning. Trapped animals were identified to species and gender and toe-
clipped with a unique combination for individual marking and identification of
recaptures (Kumar 1979). Seven sites were surveyed twice during June — July,
2000 and once in June, 2001. The remaining 8 sites were surveyed once in
June, 2001. All capturing and marking methods were conducted in accordance
with Michigan State University’s All-University Committee on Animal Use and
Care (AUF# 06/99-085-00). Incidental sightings of large mammals during
fieldwork were also recorded.
Analysis Methods

To reach the objectives of delineating the ecological zones within the
riverine-to-upland gradient, identifying vegetation characteristics capable of

discriminating between these zones, and deriving an empirical model for

17

classifying data from future sites into these ecological zones, the following
analytical methods were followed.
Community Delineation

The riverine-to-upland gradient was delineated into two separate
ecological zones based on the vegetation community, with the goal of classifying
areas into one zone, designated as an appropriate area for
disturbance/manipulation, or into a second zone designated an area to be
avoided during disturbance/manipulation activities. My intent was to include
wetland and riparian areas within the riparian zone that would be considered a
‘do not disturb’ area for management decisions and to include the upland areas
in a zone that allowed for disturbance regimes.

The term riparian can have many different meanings, depending on
discipline, geographic location, climate, and purpose of use. An example of the
difference in riparian definitions, provided by Verry et al. (2004), is how the
ranching community of the semi-arid west would include only land wetter than
upland, but not wetland, specifically excluding dry land adjacent to channels,
while foresters in the humid east would include all land adjacent to a channel up
to a specified distance. Riparian definitions generally incorporate the transitional
nature between aquatic and upland ecosystems, it being unique from both in soil
and vegetation characteristics influenced by high water table or flooding (Verry et
al. 2004, Fisher et al. 2000, Naiman and Decamps 1997). Some definitions
include all land adjacent to aquatic systems that affect or are affected by the

presence of the water body, incorporating a zone of influence (Verry et al. 2004,

18

Fisher at al. 2000). Riparian definitions and/or delineations are often defined on
a project basis, focusing on either functionality or land use application where an
exact definition is not required (USFWS 1997). My goal was to create a
management tool to delineate buffer zones where activities are restricted for the
purpose of protecting the riparian and riverine ecosystems. To reach this goal,
delineation was based on the ecological characteristic of the extent of
herbaceous plants adapted to wet soils.

The presence of hydrophytic vegetation was assessed by classifying
herbaceous species by their wetland indicator status (WIS), taken from the
National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands (Reed 1988). All plots
within an ELU were grouped into two groups, 1 or 2, based on %WIS occurrence
rules that were established individually for each habitat type. These %WIS
grouping rules were developed from histograms of %WIS data for each ELU and
personal knowledge of the sites. A delineation line separating riparian (R) and
upland (U) zones was created for each transect based on the number and
location of plots placed into group 1 and group 2. Above and below the
delineation line, > 50% of the plots had to be of one group.

Model Development

To develop a model that does not require extensive data collection, my
goal was to incorporate descriptive vegetation variables that reflect the
vegetative community composition without having to measure species
presence/absence directly. Canonical correlation was used to assess the

correlative relationship between descriptive vegetation variables (e.g., %

19

herbaceous cover, % graminoid cover, % overstory cover) and actual species
occurrence data. The descriptive variables that most strongly correlate with the
species occurrence data best explain the variation in community composition
between sample plots. These descriptive variables were chosen for model
development to produce a model that is ecologically significant and simple,
allowing its use by biologist and land managers without requiring time and labor
intensive sampling procedures, specifically, species identification botany skills.
Model development was accomplished through stepwise discriminant
analysis. Former community delineation based on %WIS gave the a priori
grouping variable of R (riparian) or U (upland) for each plot. This data set was
equally divided in half for all R plots and for all U plots in each ELU. One set was
used in discriminant analysis for model development and the remaining half for
model validation. The model development data set was analyzed by forward
stepwise discriminant analysis (using STATISTICA software) to determine which
vegetation variables, chosen previously through canonical analysis, best
discriminate between the 2 groupings R and U. The discriminant analysis model
output was tested for accuracy by entering variable values from the model
validation data subset. A comparison was made between the model group
designation (R or U) and the a priori group designation (R or U) for each case of
this data subset. The percent of cases correctly classified by the model were

determined for clarification of model accuracy.

20

 

 

EU.

:08."

AT

hert

App
com
Ive
rich,-

5.3%:

‘iS’pi
Ritz.

RESULTS
ELU Community Composition

Plant species occurrence and vegetation community composition and
structure are summarized and compared between the 3 ELUs. Avifauna,
herpetofauna, and small mammal communities are also summarized by ELU and
species presence/no detection are compared amoung the ELUs.

Vegetation Community

A total of 288 herbaceous species and 75 tree and shrub species were
identified. All species, along with their WIS and life form, are listed in Appendix
A; Table A-1 (herbaceous species) and Table A-2 (tree and shrub species).

The constancy of occurrence (percent of plots with species present) of
herbaceous species identified in each site, grouped by ELU, is provided in
Appendix B; JP-ELU Table B-1, RM-ELU Table B-2, and SM-ELU Table B-3. A
comparison of herbaceous species presence/no detection between the ELUs is
given in Table 1. RM-ELU and SM-ELU had much higher herbaceous species
richness (>200 spp) than JP-ELU (154 spp). Several dominant herbaceous
species (occurring in all sites/ELU with high constancy of occurrence values) for
JP-ELU are (in alphabetical order by species) Pennsylvania sedge (Carex
pensylvanica), blue cladonia (Cladina mitis), greygreen reindeer lichen (Cladina
rangifen’na), bracken fern (Pfen'dium aquilinum), sphagnum moss spp
(Sphagnum spp) and blueberry (Vaccinium angustifolium). Dominant species for
RM-ELU were aster spp (Aster spp), eastern teaberry (Gaultheria procumbens),

Canada mayflower (Maianthemum canadense), roughleaf ricegrass (Oryzopsis

21

I‘ I‘ll 1“ l.‘

IL It In .C r.\ we .1. 0.0 AC C aw nw.\

Table 1. Herbaceous species presence/no detection across all ELUs, JP-ELU,
RM-ELU, and SM-ELU, in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001.

 

 

Species Common Name JP-ELU RM-ELU SM-ELU
Achillea millefolium common ya rrow X X
Actaea pachypoda white banebeny X
Adiantum aleuticum maidenhair fem X X
Agn'monia rostellata agrimony X X
Agnoslis gigantea redtop X X X
Agrostis hyemalis winter bentgrass X X X
Agnostis perennans upland bentgrass X
Allium spp onion spp X X
Allium tn’coccum wild leek X
Amphicarpaea bracteata American hogpeanut X X
Andmpogon gerardii big bluestem X

Anemone canadensis Canadian anemone X X X
Anemone quinquefolia nightcaps X X X
Anemone virginiana tall thimbleweed X X
Antennaria neglecta field pussytoes X X X
Apocynum flon’bundum dogbane X X X
Aquilegia canadensis red columbine X X

Amlia nudicaulis wild sarsparilla X X
Arctostaphylos uva-ursi kinnikinnick X X X
Arenan‘a serpyllifolia thymeleaf sandwort X
An'saema tn'phyllum Jack in the pulpit X X X
Asclepias incamata swamp milkweed X X
Asclepias spp milkweed spp X X
Asclepias syriaca common milkweed X

Asplenium spp spleenwort spp X X
Aster spp aster spp X X X
Athyn’um filix-femina common ladyfem X X X
Avena fatua wild cat X X

Barbarea vulgan's garden yellowrocket X
Bidens spp beggarticks spp X

Blephilia ciliata downy pagoda-plant X X X
Botrychium virginianum rattlesnake fern X
Brachyelytrum erectum bearded shorthusk X X X
Bromus ciliatus fn'nged brome X X X
Bromus spp bromus spp X

Bmmus tectorum cheatg rass X X
Blyophyte spp moss spp X X
Calamagmstis canadensis bluejoint X X X
Calamagmstis stricta northern reedgrass X
Caltha palustn‘s yellow marsh marigold X X X
Camassia soil/aides Atlantic camas X
Campanula apan'noides pursh marsh bellflower X X X
Campanula mtundifolia bluebell bellflower X X

Carex albursina white bear sedge X X
Carex arctata drooping woodland sedge X

 

22

Table 1 (cont’d).

 

 

Species Common Name JP-ELU RM-ELU SM-ELU
Carex aurea golden sedge X

Carex bebbii Bebb's sedge X X X
Carex castanea chestnut sedge X

Carex communis fibrousroot sedge X
Carex cn‘nita fn'nged sedge X X
Carex cn'statella crested sedge X
Carex deweyana dewey sedge X
Carex dispenna softleaf sedge X X
Carex ebumea bristleleaf sedge X

Carex fiava yellow sedge X X X
Carex formosa handsome sedge X X

Carex gracillima graceful sedge X X X
Carex granulan's limestone meadow sedge X

Carex hystericina bottlebmsh sedge X X X
Carex interior inland sedge X X X
Carex intumescens greater bladder sedge X X X
Carex Iaxiculmis spreading sedge X

Carex Iaxiflora broad looseflower sedge X X
Carex Ieptalea bristlystalked sedge X X X
Carex Ieptonervia nerveless woodland sedge X X
Carex Iupulina hop sedge X

Carex magellanica boreal bog sedge X

Carex peckii Peck's sedge X
Carex pedunculata longstalk sedge X X
Carex pellita woolly sedge X

Carex pensylvanica Pennsylvania sedge X X X
Carex plantaginea plantainleaf sedge X X X
Carex prasina drooping sedge X X
Carex projecta necklace sedge X
Carex relmrsa knotsheath sedge X X
Carex rosea rosy sedge X
Carex mstrata beaked sedge X X

Carex rugosperma parachute sedge X X
Carex scabrata eastern rough sedge X

Carex scopan‘a broom sedge X X X
Carex spp carex spp X

Carex sprengelii Sprengel‘s sedge X X
Carex stipata owlfruit sedge X X X
Carex sln‘cta upright sedge X X X
Carex tenera quill sedge X
Carex tn’sperma threeseeded sedge X

Carex vulpinoidea fox sedge X
Caulophyllum thalictmides blue cohosh X X
Centaun’um pulchellum branched centaury X
Cerastium fontanum big chickweed X
Chelone glabra turtle head X X
Cicuta bulbifera bulb bearing water hemlock X X
Cicuta maculata spotted water hemlock X X

 

23

 

 

 

 

 

 

II I. II. It E It IF‘ P..‘ P‘ \\

Table 1 (cont’d).

 

 

Species Common Name JP-ELU RM-ELU SM-ELU
Cimicifuga racemosa black cohosh X X
Cinna Iatifolia drooping woodreed X X

Circaea alpina small enchanters nightshade X X
Cirsium spp thistle spp X X X
Cladina mitis blue cladonia X X

Cladina rangifen‘na greygreen reindeer lichen X X X
Cladonia cn'statella cup lichen X X X
Clematis occidentalis western blue virginsbower X X X
Clinopodium vulgare wild basil X X
Clintonia umbellulata white clintonia X X
Coeloglossum viride long bract frog orchid X

Comptonia peregrine sweet fern X X
Convolvulus arvensis field bindweed X X X
Coptis tn‘folia goldth read X X X
Comus canadensis bunchbeny dogwood X X X
Crepis capillaris smooth hawksbeard X X X
Cryptotaenia canadensis Canadian honewort X X
Cypn’pedium an'etinum ram's head lady's slipper X
Cypripedium spp lady's slipper spp X X

Dacfylis glomerata orchardg rass X

Dalibarda repens robin runaway X

Danthonia spicata poverty oatgrass X X X
Decodon verticillatus swamp loosestn’fe X
Deschampsia flexuosa wavy hairgrass X X X
Dichanthelium depauperatum starved panicgrass X X
Dichanthelium Iatifolium broadleaf rosette grass X
Dichanthelium Iinearifolium slimleaf panicg rass X X
Dichanthelium xanthophysum slender roseete grass X

Drosera rotundifolia round leaved sundew X
Dryopten’s boottii Boott's fern X X
Dryopteris carthusiana spinulose woodfem X X X
Dryopten’s marginalis marginal woodfem X
Eleochan's rostellata beaked spikerush X

Elymus hystrix eastern bottlebrush grass X

Elymus repens quackg rass X X

Elymus trachycaulus slender wheatgrass X X X
Elymus virginicus Virginia wildrye X X X
Epigaea repens trailing arbutus X X X
Epilobium ciliatum fringed willowherb X X
Epilobium Ieptophyllum bog willowherb X
Epipactis hellebon‘ne broadleaf hellebon'ne X
Equisetum fluviatile water horsetail X X X
Equisetum hyemale scouring rush horsetail X X
Erigeron pulchellus robin plantain X X
En'ophorum vin'dican‘natum thinleaf cottonsedge X
Eupatorium fistulosum trumpetweed X
E upatorium perfoliatum boneset X
Eupatorium purpureum sweetscented joepyeweed X X X

 

24

Table 1 (cont’dL

 

 

Species Common Name JP-ELU RM-ELU SM-ELU
Euphorbia corollata flowering spurge X
Euphorbia esula leafy spurge X

Festuca subverticillata nodding fescue X X
Fragan‘a spp strawberry spp X X X
Galium asprellum rough bedstraw X X X
Galium odoratum sweet scented bedstraw X X X
Gauftheria hispidula creeping snowbeny X X
Gaulthen'a procumbens eastern teaberry X X X
Gaylussacia baccata black huckleberry X X

Genista tincton'a dyers greenweed X

Geum aleppicum yellow avens X
Geum Iaciniatum rough avens X X X
Glyceria canadensis rattlesnake mannagrass X

Gchen‘a striata fowl mannagrass X X X
Gymnocarpium dryopten's western oakfem X X
Halenia deflexa American spurred gentian X
Helianthemum bicknellii hoary frostweed X

Helianthus divan’catus woodland sunflower X

Hepatica nobilis var. acuta sharp lobed hepatica X
Hepatica nobilis var. Danade round lobed hepatica X X
Hieracium caespitosum meadow hawkweed X X X
Hieracium canadense Canada hawkweed X

Hieracium spp hawkweed spp X X X
Hieracium venosum rattlesnake weed X X
Hydmcotyle Danadensi American marshpennywort X X X
Hypen'cum perforatum common St. Johnswort X X X
Impatiens capensis jewe lweed X X X
In's versicolor blue flag X X X
Juncus tenuis poverty rush X

Justicia Elanadensi American water-willow X
Koelen'a macrantha prairie junegrass X

Lactuca hirsute hairy lettuce X
Lactuca sem’ola prickly lettuce X X

Lactuca tatarica blue lettuce X

Laportea [janadensis Canadian woodnettle X
Lapsana communis common nipplewort X

Leersia oryzoides rice cutg rass X X
Lilium spp lily spp X
Linnaea borealis twinflower X X
Listera spp twayblade spp X
Lobelia cardinalis cardinal flower X
Lycopodium spp clubmoss spp X X X
Lycopus amen’canus American water horehound X X X
Lycopus uniflorus bugleweed X X X
Lysimachia ciliata fringed loosestrife X X X
Lysimachia terrestris earth loosestrife X X
Maianthemum canadense Canada mayflower X X X
Matteuccia struthiopteris ostrich fern X X

 

25

Table 1 (cont’d).

 

 

Species Common Name JP-ELU RM-ELU SM-ELU
Medea/a virginiana Indian cucumber X X
Melampyrum Iineare narrowleaf cowwh eat X X
Melanthium virginicum Virginia bunchflower X
Melica smithii Smith’s melicgrass X X X
Mentha arvensis wild mint X
Mentha pipen‘ta peppermint X
Milium effusum American milletgrass X X X
Mitchel/a repens partridgebeny X X X
Mite/la diphylla twoleaf mitenivort X X X
Mitella nude naked miterwort X X X
Monanda fistulosa wild bergamot X
Muhlenbergia glomerata spiked muhly X X
Muhlenbergia mexicana Mexican muhly X
Myosotis scorpioides tme forget me not X

Nepeta catan'a catnip X X X
None no cover X X
Oenothera biennis common evening primrose X
Onoclea sensibilis sensitive fern X X X
Oryzopsis aspen'folia roughleaf ricegrass X X X
Osmorhiza berteroi sweet cicely X X
Osmunda cinnamomea cinnamon fern X X X
Osmunda claytoniana intenupted fern X

Osmunda regalis royal fern X X X
Packera obovata round leaved ragwort X

Panicum capillare witchg rass X X
Panicum spp panicum spp X X
Pamassia palustn's grass of pamassus X X
Parthenocissus quinquefolia Virginia creeper X X
Pediculan’s Elmen'canaEl Canadian lousewort X X
Phalaris arundinacea reed canarygrass X X X
Phleum pratense timothy X X
Pilea pumila Canadian clearweed X X
Piptatherum pungens mountain riceg rass X X X
Piptatherum racemosum blackseed ricegrass X
Platanthera Elmen‘canaljn northern green orchid X

Poa palustn‘s fowl bluegrass X X X
Poa pratensis Kentucky bluegrass X
Polygala paucifolia gaywings X X X
Polygala palygama racemed milkwort X X
Polygonatum spp Solomon's seal spp X X X
Polygonum scandens climbing false buckweat X

Potentiila simplex common cinquefoil X

Prenanthes alba white rattlesnakeroot X X X
Prunella vulgan’s common selfheal X X X
Prunus pumila sand cheny X X

Pteridium aquilinum bracken fern X X X
PymIa Elmericana American Wintergreen X X
Ranunculus abortivus I'rttleleaf buttercu p X

 

26

Table 1 (cont’d).

 

 

Species Common Name JP—ELU RM-ELU SM-ELU
Ranunculus hispidus bristly buttercup X X X
Ranunculus pensylvanicus Pennsylvania buttercup X X
Ranunculus recurvatus bliste rwort X X
Ribes Iacustre bristly black currant X X
Rubus chamaemorus cloud berry X

Rubus spp blackbeny/raspbeny spp X X X
Rudbeckia Iaciniata cutleaf coneflower X
Rumex acetosella sheep sorrel X X
Rumex crispus curted dock X

Rumex obtusifolius broad dock X
Rumex verticillatus swamp dock X

Sagittaria latifolia broad leaved arrowhead X X
Sanicula odorata black snakeroot X X
Schizachne purpurascens false melic X X
Schizachyn‘um scopan'um little bluestem X
Schoenoplectus amen‘canus chairmaker's bulmsh X X
Scirpus cypen'nus woolg rass X X
Scutellan'a elliptica hairy skullcap X

Scutellan'a galericulata marsh skullcap X X X
Scutellan’a incana hoary skullcap X

Scutellan’a Iateriflora blue skullcap X X X
Sibbaldiopsis ElastateElte shrubby fivefingers X

Smilax tamnoides bristly greenbrier X

Solanum dulcamara bittersweet nightshade X X
Solidago spp goldenrod spp X X X
Sorghastrum nutans indiangrass X

Sphagnum spp sphagnum moss spp X X X
Sphenopholis intennedia slender wedgescale X

Sporobolus cryptandrus sand dropseed X
Taraxacum otl‘icinale common dandelion X X X
Thalictrum dioicum early meadow rue X X X
Thalictrum pubescens king of the meadow X X X
Thalictrum thalictnoides rue anemone X X
Toxicodendmn radicans poison ivy X X X
Tn'adenum virginicum Virginia marsh St Johnswort X

Tn'entalis borealis starflower X X X
Tn'folium spp clover spp X X
Trillium cemuum whip-poor-will flower X X
Trillium undulatum painted trillium X X X
Typha spp cattail spp X X
Unknown spp unknown spp X X X
Urtica dioica stinging nettle X

Vaccinium angustifolium blueberry X X X
Vaccinium corymbosum highbush bluebeny X

Verbascum thapsus common mullein X X
Verbena Uastate blue vervain X
Veronica anagallis-aquatica water speedwell X

Veronica filiformis threadstalk speedwell X

 

27

Table 1 (cont’d).

 

 

Species Common Name JP-ELU RM—ELU SM-ELU
Veronica ofiicinalis common gypsyweed X X
Veronica spp speedwell spp X
Wcia spp vetch spp X

Viola spp violet spp X X X
Total number of species 154 202 207

 

depauperatum), bracken fern, sphagnum moss spp, and blueberry. Those
species dominant in SM-ELU were aster spp, Canada mayflower, bracken fern,
blackberry/raspberry spp (Rubus spp), and sphagnum moss spp. Plots that had
no herbaceous species present (i.e., species equals ‘None’), occurred in all SM-
ELU sites at a high frequency. This lack of ground cover/understory
development is characteristic of AFOIAFO-phase habitat types (Burger and Kotar
2003)

Small tree (diameter <10 cm) and shrub species observed in each site are
listed in Appendix B; JP-ELU Table B-4, RM-ELU Table B-5, and SM-ELU Table
B6. The occurrence of small tree and shrub species are compared between the
three ELUs in Table 2. SM-ELU has the highest understory species richness
(59) and JP-ELU has the lowest (39). Dominant understory species in JP-ELU
are (in alphabetical order by species) juneberry spp (Amelanchier spp), jack pine
(Pinus banksiana), black cherry (Prunus serotina), and red oak (Quercus rubra).
Dominant species in RM-ELU were red maple (Acer rubrum), juneberry, black
cherry, and red oak. Dominant species in SM-ELU were red maple, sugar maple
(Acer saccharum), juneberry, ironwood (Carpinus caroliniana), and black cherry.
Sixteen understory species occurred in SM-ELU only; for example, 3 maple

species, (striped maple (A. pensylvanicum), silver maple (A. saccharinum), and

28

Table 2. Small tree (diameter <10 cm) and shrub species presence/no detection
across all ELUs, JP-ELU, RM-ELU, and SM-ELU, in northern Lower Michigan,

 

 

2000-2001.

Species Common Name JP-ELU RM-ELU SM-ELU
Abies balsamea balsam fir X X X
Acer pensylvanicum striped maple X
Acer rubrum red maple X X X
Acer saccharinum silver maple X
Acer saccharum sugar maple X X
Acer spicatum mountain maple X
Alnus rugosa speckled alder X X X
Amelanchier spp juneberry spp X X X
Betula alleghaniensis yellow birch X
Betula papyn‘fera paper birch X X
Betula pumila swamp birch X

Carpinus caroliniana ironwood X X
Cephalanthus occidentalis common button brush X
Camus altemifolia altemateleaf dogwood X X
Corylus comuta beaked hazelnut X X
Camus faemina stiff dogwood X
Camus spp dogwood spp X X X
Camus sen’cea red osier dogwood X X X
Crataegus spp hawthorn spp X X X
Dasiphara flaribunda shmbby cinquefoil X

Fagus gandifalia American beech X X
Fraxinus amen'cana white ash X
Fraxinus niga black ash X
Fraxinus pennsylvanica green ash X X
Hamamelis virginiana American witch hazel X X
Kalmia palifalia pale laurel X

Larix Ian'cina tama rack X X X
Lanicera hirsute hairy honeysuckle X X

Lanicera spp honeysuckle spp X X X
Lanicera ablangifalia swamp fly honeysuckle X X
Lanicera sempervirens trumpet honeysuckle X
None no cover X
Physacarpus apulifalius ninebark X X X
Pinus banksiana jack pine X X

Picea glauca white spruce X X
Picea mariana black spruce X X
Picea pungens blue spruce X X

Pinus resinasa red pine X X

Pinus strabus white pine X X X
Papulus balsamifera balsam poplar X X X
Papulus grandidentata bigtooth aspen X X X
Papulus tremuloides quaking aspen X X X
Prunus niga Canadian plum X
Prunus pensylvanica pin cheny X

Prunus serotina black cheny X X X

 

29

Table 2 (cont’d).

 

 

Species Common Name JP-ELU RM-ELU SM-ELU
Prunus spp cheny spp X X X
Prunus virginiana choke cherry X X X
Ptelea trifaliata common haptree X

Quercus alba white oak X X

Quercus rubra red oak X X X
Rhamnus alnifalia alderteaf buckthom X X X
Ribes americanum American black cu rrant X
Ribes spp currant spp X

Ribes cynasbati prickly gooseberry X X
Ribes glandulasum skunk cu rra nt X
Ribes hirtellum smooth goosebeny X X
Ribes hudsanianum northern black currant X
Ribes Iacustne bristly black currant X X X
Ribes tn‘ste red curra nt X
Rosa spp wild rose spp X X

Salix spp willow spp X X
Sambucus nigra common elderbeny X X
Smilax tamnoides bristly greenbrier X

Spiraea alba narrow leaved meadow sweet X

Thuja occidentalis arborvitae X X
Tilia americana basswood X X
Tsuga canadensis hemlock X X
Ulmus americana American elm X X
Unknown spp unknown spp X X X
Wbumum acen’falium mapleleaf vibumum X X
Vibumum spp vibumum spp X X
Vibumum Ientaga nannybeny X
Vibumum apulus cranberry vibumum X X X
Vitis palmata catbird grape X
Vibumum rafinesquianum downy arrow wood X

Vitis riparia riverbank grape X

Total number of species 39 48 59

 

mountain maple (A. spicatum)), yellow birch (Betula alleghaniensis), white and

black ash (Fraxinus americana and F. nigra), and 4 currant species (American

black currant (Ribes americanum), skunk currant (R. glandulasum), northern

black currant (R. hudsanianum) and red currant (R. triste)).

Large tree species’ (DBH >10 cm) constancy of occurrence in each site is

presented in Appendix B; JP-ELU Table B-7, RM-ELU Table B-8, and SM-ELU

Table B-9. Tree species occurrence is compared among the three ELUs in Table

30

3. SM-ELU had the highest species richness (22) and JP-ELU has the lowest

(9). The dominant tree species (occurring in all sites/ELU with high constancy of

occurrence values) in JP-ELU was jack pine. The dominant overstory species in

RM-ELU were (in alphabetical order by species) red maple, red pine (Pinus

resinasa), and white pine (Pinus strabes). Dominant overstory species for SM-

ELU were red maple, sugar maple, and ironwood (Carpinus caroliniana).

Table 3. Tree species (DBH >10 cm) presence/no detection across all ELUs, JP-

ELU, RM-ELU, and SM-ELU, in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001.

 

 

Species Common Name JP-ELU RM-ELU SM-ELU
Abies balsamea balsam fir X X X
Acer rubrum red maple X X X
Acer saccharum sugar maple X X
Amelanchier spp junebeny spp X
Betula alleghaniensis yellow birch X
Betula papyn'fera pa per birch X X
Carpinus caroliniana ironwood X
Fagus grandifolia American beech X
Fraxinus americana white ash X
Fraxinus nigra black ash X
Fraxinus pennsyivanica green ash X X
Larix Ian'cina tamarack X

None no cover X X X
Pinus banksiana jack pine X X

Picea glauca white spruce X
Picea mariana black spruce X X
Picea pungens blue spruce X

Pinus resinasa red pine X X

Pinus strabus white pine X X X
Papulus balsamifera balsam poplar X

Papulus grandidentata bigtooth aspen X X
Papulus tremuloides quaking aspen X X
Prunus serotina black cherry X X X
Quercus alba white oak X

Quercus rubra red oak X X

Thuja occidentalis arborvitae X X
Tilia americana basswood X X
Tsuga canadensis hemlock X X
Ulmus americana American elm X
Vibumum spp vibumum spp X
Total number of species 9 18 22

 

31

The average percent cover for three stratified vegetation layers,
herbaceous, woody understory (height <2 m), and woody overstory (height >2
m), for each site is given in Appendix B, Table B-10. Percent cover averaged
over all sites/ELU is given in Table 4. SM-ELU has the lowest percent
herbaceous cover combined with the highest percent overstory cover. RM-ELU
has the highest percent herbaceous cover and JP-ELU the lowest percent
overstory cover.

Table 4. Average percent cover (standard error in parentheses) of herbaceous
species (graminoid and forb cover combined), woody understory (<2 m in height)

canopy and woody overstory (>2 m in height) canopy in each ELU, in northern
Lower Michigan, 2000-2001.

 

 

ELU Herbaceous Understory Overstory
JP-ELU 33.0 (17.6) 14.6 (18.9) 42.7 (22.9)
RM—ELU 43.8 (21.3) 16.6 (15.1) 61.6 (23.3)
SM-ELU 22.7 (28.3) 20.5 (15.5) 79.6 (25.0)

 

Vertebrate Community

A total of 92 avian species were heard/seen, 13 herpetofauna species
were observed, and 15 small mammal species captured during surveys of the 15
sites in northern Lower Michigan during 2000 and 2001.

The number of individuals of avian species observed per survey in each
site is provided in Appendix C; JP-ELU Table C-1, RM-ELU Table C-2, and SM-
ELU Table C-3. The occurrence of avian species is compared among the three
ELUs in Table 5. JP-ELU had the highest avian species richness (78) and RM—
ELU the lowest (60). Several dominant avian species (occurring in all sites/ELU

with high numbers of individuals/survey) for JP-ELU are (in alphabetical order by

32

Table 5. Avian species presence/no detection across all ELUs, JP-ELU, RM-

ELU, and SM-ELU, in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001.

 

 

Species Common Name JP-ELU RM-ELU SM-ELU
Agelaius phoeniceus red-winged blackbird X

Ardea heradias great blue heron X
Baealaphus bicalar tuffed titmouse X

Bambycilla cedrarum cedar waxwi ng X X X
Banasa umbellus ruffed grouse X X X
Branta canadensis Canada goose X
Buteo spp unkown hawk spp X

Butan’des striatus green-backed heron X

Carduelis pinus pine siskin X
Carduelis ln'stis American goldfinch X X X
Carpadacus purpureus purple finch X X X
Catharus fuscescens veery X X X
Catharus guttatus hermit IhI'USh X X X
Certhia americana brown creeper X X
Ceryle alcyan belted kingfisher X X X
Charadn‘us vociferus killdeer X

Chordeiles minor common nighthawk X

Caccyzus americanus yellow-billed cuckoo X X
Caccyzus erythrapthalmus black-billed cuckoo X X X
Calaptes auratus northern flicker X X X
Cantapus caapen' olive-sided flycatcher X

Cantopus virens eastern wood peewee X X X
Corvus brachyrhynchas American crow X X X
Corvus carax common raven X X X
Cyanacitta cn’stata blue jay X X X
Dendraica camnata yellow-rumped warbler X

Dendraica fusca blackbumian warbler X X

Dendraica magnolia magnolia warbler X X X
Dendraica pensylvanica chestnut-sided wa rbler X X X
Dendraica petechia yellow wa rbler X X X
Dendraica pinus pine warbler X

Dendraica tign'na Cape May warbler X

Dendraica virens black-throated green warbler X X X
Dryacapus pileatus pileated woodpecker X X X
Duck spp unkown duck spp X X
Dumetella caralinensis gray catbird X X X
Empidanax minimus least flycatcher X X
Empidanax fiaillii willow flycatcher X
Eremaphila alpestn's homed lark X
Gallinaga gallinaga common snipe X X

Geothlypis trichas common yellowthroat X X X
Hylacichla mustelina wood thrush X X
laterus galbula northern oriole X X
Ixabrychus exilis least bittem X
Junca hyemalis dark-eyed junco X X

Lanius Iudavicianus loggerhead shrike X X

 

33

Table 5 (cont’d).

 

 

Species Common Name JP-ELU RM-ELU SM-ELU
Laxia curvirostra red crossbill X
Melanerpes erythracephalus red-headed woodpecker X X

Meleagris gallopava wild turkey X X
Melaspiza geargiana swamp sparrow X X X
Melaspiza meladia . song sparrow X X X
Mniatilta van'a black-and-white warbler X X X
Malathrus ater brown headed cowbird X

Myiarchus cn‘nitus great crested flycatcher X X X
Opammis agilis Connecticut warbler X X

Oparamis philadelphia mourning wa rbler X X X
Parula americana northern parula X X
Passen‘na cyanea indigo bunting X X
Pheucticus Iudavicianus rose-breasted grosbeak X X X
Picaides pubescens downy wood pecker X X X
Picaides villasus hairy woodpecker X X

Pipila erythraphthalmus roufaus-sided towhee X X
Piranga alivacea scarlet tanager X X X
Paecile atn'capillus black-capped chickadee X X X
Paaecetes gramineus vesper sparrow X

Quiscalus quiscula common grackle X X X
Regulus calendula ruby-crowned kinglet X

Regulus satrapa golden-crowned kinglet X X
Sayamis phoebe eastern phoebe X X
Seiurus auracapilla ovenbird X X X
Seiurus navebaracensis northern waterthrush X X X
Setaphaga ruticilla American redstart X X
Sialia sialis eastern bluebird X

Sitta canadensis red-breasted nuthatch X X X
Sitta caralinensis white-breasted nuthatch X X X
Sphyrapicus varius yellow-bellied sapsucker X X X
Spizella passen’na chipping spa rraw X X X
Taxostama rufum brown thrasher X X
Tragladytes troglodytes winter wren X X X
Turdus migratan'us American robin X X X
Tyrannus tyrannus eastern kingbird X
Unknown spp unknown spp X X X
Vennivara chrysaptera golden-winged warbler X
Vermivora ruficapilla Nashville warbler X X X
Vireo flavilrons yellow-throated vireo X X
Vireo gilvus warbling vireo X X X
Vireo alivaceus red-eyed vireo X X X
Vireo solitan'us solitary vireo X X
Wilsania canadensis Canada warbler X
Woodpecker spp unknown woodpecker spp X X X
Zenaida macraura mourning dove X X X
Zanatn'chia albicallis white-throated sparrow X X X
Total number of species 78 59 68

 

34

 

 

 

596
on:
aux
ml'g
liN
am
nut
We
(85
blue

ano

Dinu
ihtas
elsev
van'ug

JP~EL

obseme
Table C
”Warec
”Cities (5

500th We

species) the American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchas), blue jay (Cyanacitta
cn'stata), black-capped chickadee (Paecile atn'capillus), ovenbird (Seiurus
auracapilla), chipping sparrow (Spizella passen'na), American robin (Turdus
migraton'us), and Nashville warbler (Vermivara ruficapilla). Dominant species in
RM-ELU include the hermit thrush (Catharus guttatus), northern flicker (Calaptes
auratus), eastern wood peewee (Contapus virens), blue jay, white-breasted
nuthatch (Sitta caralinensis), American robin, Nashville warbler, and red-eyed
vireo (Vireo alivaceus). Several dominant species in SM-ELU are cedar waxwing
(Bomb ycilla cedrorum), veery (Catharus fuscescens), eastern wood peewee,
blue jay, scarlet tanager (Piranga alivacea), black-capped chickadee, ovenbird,
and red-eyed vireo.

The yellow-rumped warbler (Dendraica caranata) and pine warbler (D.
pinus) both were frequently observed and unique to JP-ELU. The brown
thrasher (Taxostama rufum) was frequently observed in JP-ELU but observed
elsewhere only in 1 SM-ELU site. The yellow-bellied sapsucker (Sphyrapicus
van'us) was observed frequently in both RM-ELU and SM-ELU but only in one
JP-ELU site.

Herpetofauna species and the number of individuals of each species
observed in each site are presented in Appendix C; JP-ELU Table C-4, RM-ELU
Table C-5, SM-ELU Table C-6. Occurrence of herpetofauna species are
compared among ELUs in Table 6. SM-ELU sites have the highest species
richness (9). Dominant species (occur in 4 or 5 sites/ELU) in each ELU are the

smooth green snake (Opheodrys vernalis) in JP-ELU, and the eastem American

35

Tabll
RM-l

t9?
Ant»
Bub
Hbtv
Opne
Pttl
Fteu
Rana
Rena
Rana
Rana
Etna
Than
Tunt
:33?

load

Table 6. Herpetofauna species presence/no detection across all ELUs, JP-ELU,
RM-ELU, and SM-ELU, in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001.

 

 

Species Common Name JP-ELU RM-ELU SM-ELU
Ambystama laterale blue-spotted salamander X

Bufa americanus americanus eastern American toad X X X
Heterodan platiminas eastern hognose snake X

Opheadrys vemalis smooth green snake X

Plethadon cinereus redback salamander X X X
Pseudacn‘s crucifer crucifer northern spring peeper X X
Rana catesbeiana bull frag X X
Rana clamitans melanata green frog X X X
Rana palustn’s pickerel frog X
Rana pipiens northern leopard frog X

Rana sylvatica wood frog X X
Thamnaphis sirtalis sirtalis eastem garter snake X X
Turtle spp unknown turtle spp X
Total number of species 7 7 9

 

toad (Bufa americanus americanus), redback salamander (Plethadon cinereus)
and green frog (Rana clamitans melanata) in both RM-ELU and SM-ELU. The
blue-spotted salamander (Ambystama laterale) and smooth green snake were
observed in upland areas of JP-ELU sites only. The eastern hognose snake
(Heteradan platirhinas) was observed in RM-ELU only. The redback salamander
was found in upland areas of all ELUs and the green frog was found in riparian
areas of all ELUs.

The number individuals of small mammal species trapped per trap night in
each site is presented in Appendix C; JP-ELU Table C-7, RM-ELU Table C-8,
SM-ELU Table C-9. The occurrence of small mammal species are compared
amoung the ELUs in Table 7. JP-ELU has the highest species richness (12).
Dominant species (occur in 4 or 5 sites/ELU) in all three ELUs were the deer
mouse (Peramyscus maniculatus) and eastern chipmunk (Tamias striatus), and

additionally the shorttail shrew (Blarina brevicauda) in RM-ELU. The thirteen-

36

lined ground squirrel (Cite/[us tridecemlineatus), northem flying squirrel
(Glaucomys sabrinus), and southern flying squirrel (G. valans) were observed in
JP-ELU sites only. The starnose mole (Condylura cristata) was found in RM-
ELU sites only.

Table 7. Small mammal species presence/no detection across all ELUs, JP-
ELU, RM-ELU, and SM-ELU, in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001.

 

 

Species Common Name JP-ELU RM-ELU SM-ELU
Blan‘na brevicauda shorttail shrew X X X
Citellus tridecemlineatus thirteen-lined ground squirrel X

Clethrionomys gappen' boreal red back vole X X
Candylura cristata starnose mole X

Cryptotis parva least shrew X

Glaucomys sabrinus northern flying squirrel X

Glaucomys valans southern flying squirrel X

Napaeazapus insignis woodland jumping mouse X X X
Peramyscus maniculatus deer mouse X X X
Shrew spp unknown shrew spp X X
Sarex cinereus masked shrew X X
Synapyamys caapen' southern bog lemming X X

Tamias striatus eastem chipmunk X X X
Tamiasciurus hudsanicus red squirrel X X

Zapus hudsanius meadow jumping mouse X X
Total number of species 12 9 8

 

Community Delineation

The riverine-to-upland gradient was delineated into a lower (wetland/riparian)
and upper (upland) zone based on the vegetation community. Vegetation plots
were first grouped into two groups, either 1 or 2, based on the percent
distribution of herbaceous species WIS in each plot. Species’ WIS were taken
from the National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands (Reed 1988),
developed as part of the National Wetland Inventory undertaken by the United

States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). This list ranks individual vascular

37

plant species into indicator categories according to their probability of occurring

in wetlands. The following categories were developed by the USFWS:

. Obligate Wetland (OBL) - Almost always occurs in wetlands (estimated
probability > 99%) under natural conditions;

. Facultative Wetland (FACW) - Usually occurs in wetlands (estimated
probability 67% - 99%), but occasionally found in non-wetlands;

. Facultative (FAC) - Equally likely to occur in wetlands (estimated probability
34% - 66%) or non-wetlands;

. Facultative Upland (FACU) - Usually occur in non-wetlands (estimated
probability 67% - 99%), but occasionally found in wetlands (estimated
probability 1% - 33%); and

o Obligate Upland (UPL) - Occur almost always (estimated probability > 99% in

non-wetlands under natural conditions.

The facultative categories also use a positive (+) and negative (-) sign to
further distinguish species wetland preference. The (+) sign indicates a frequency
towards the wetter end of the category while the (-) sign indicates a frequency
towards the drier end of the category. A ND and NI category were also included.
The NO category indicates a species that has not been given an indicator status
because it is assumed an upland species. The NI category was given when the
regional panel was not able to reach a unanimous decision on a particular
species or when insufficient information was available to determine an indicator

status.

38

Hydrophytic vegetation includes all plant species categorized as OBL,
FACW+, FACW, FACW-, FAC+, and FAC, while non-hydrophytic vegetation
includes all plant species categorized as FAC-, FACU+, FACU, FACU-, and UPL
(Reed 1988). The US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Wetlands Delineation
Manual includes a wetland determination factor of greater than 50% hydrophytic
vegetation cover, along with additional factors of hydric soils and wetland
hydrology (USACE 1987). Although riparian areas, like wetlands, are closely
related to the depth and duration of surface and subsurface water, as a transition
zone between wetlands and uplands, they are not as strongly dependent on
these characteristics. The same follows for the presence of hydrophytic plant
species. Many riparian plants may be on the national list of wetland plant
species (Reed 1988) while many others are true upland species expressing
greater vigor due to increased water compared to upland situations (USFWS
1997)

To develop the riparian/upland grouping rules for vegetation plots within
each ELU, the descriptive statistics for herbaceous WIS variables and their
histograms were reviewed. Two example histograms, Figure 4 and Figure 5,
visually show the obvious trends in the WIS distributions. Detailed statistics of
herbaceous WIS distributions in each ELU are given in Table 8. This
information, along with knowledge of the sites, was used to create the %WIS
grouping rules for each ELU shown in Table 9. After grouping plots into either
group 1 or 2, each sampling transect was delineated into two discrete zones,

riparian (R) and upland (U) zones, based on the location of plots placed into

39

group 1 and group 2 (Table 10). The R zone was extended outward from the
stream with the following rules; 1) R zone ended prior to 2 or more consecutive
plots in group 2, unless the consecutive plots in group 2 were plots 1 and 2
followed by 2 or more plots in group 1 (Table 10, example 5), and 2) 250% of the

plots in either the R zone or U zone had to be in group 1 or group 2, respectively.

Histogram: %O B L for S M-ELU
200 fi' VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV

 

180 r
160 r
140 '
120 r
100
80 r

O)
O

N
O

 

siojd jo JOQUUJI'I N
5
O

    

 

 

SWW

\\

 

I, . . {l/lz W/AV/z

   

. I
’5” I, II 'I/ '1.

 

V/aV/II/z’sz/flxV/é /;'/.. .. .. “fl-”m,“ ”mu.”
5 8 11 14 17 21 27 33 40 44 50
%OBL

I I

 

O
C

Figure 4. Histogram of percent wetland indicator status (WIS) obligate wetland
(OBL) within SM-ELU, in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001.

40

Histogram: %UPL for SM-ELU

 

I V r I V V V

 

80

70-

17 21 25 29 33 43 56 64 75 100

13

A

/

///////

 

Z%%%%%% 0

b r b b

0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6 5 4 3 2 1
2569 Q now

%UPL

Figure 5. Histogram of percent wetland indicator status (WIS) obligate upland

(UPL) within SM-ELU, in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001.

41

Table 8. Descriptive statistics for wetland indicator status (WIS) variables within

each ELU, JP-ELU, RM-ELU, and SM-ELU, in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2001 .
Freq.
ll of Lower Upper Std.
WIS Plots Mean Median Mode Mode Min. Max. Quartile Quartile Dev.
JP-ELU
% FAC 251 4.15 0 O 140 0 28.57 0 5.88 6.14
% FACU 251 25.65 26.09 33.33 14 0 68.75 14.29 36.00 14.06
% FACW 251 1.47 0 0 215 0 27.27 0 O 4.35
% OBL 251 2.31 0 0 219 0 42.86 0 0 6.91
% UPL 251 54.05 58.82 66.67 14 0 92.86 41.38 68.18 20.80
% NI 251 12.38 11.54 0 26 0 47.46 5.56 16.67 8.49
RM-ELU
% FAC 237 14.62 15.00 0 40 0 40.00 6.25 22.41 10.00
% FACU 237 36.15 34.48 50.00 9 0 100.00 17.39 50.00 23.92
% FACW 237 3.46 0 0 161 0 32.56 0 4.00 6.61
% OBL 237 4.71 0 0 165 0 60.87 0 4.00 10.20
% UPL 237 26.39 23.81 0 18 O 90.91 13.16 35.00 18.04
% Nl 237 14.61 13.33 0 39 0 75.00 5.56 23.08 11.48
SM-ELU
% FAC 277 14.08 8.70 0 101 0 100.00 0 20.00 18.03
% FACU 277 14.48 12.20 0 94 0 66.67 0 25.00 14.70
% FACW 277 12.97 2.94 0 135 0 100.00 0 19.05 20.46
% OBL 277 6.73 0 O 180 0 55.88 0 8.70 12.23
% UPL 277 22.44 16.67 0 64 0 100.00 5.00 31.82 23.01
% Nl 277 28.22 28.00 0 57 0 100.00 9.09 41.67 22.20

 

42

Table 9. Percent wetland indicator status (WIS) grouping rules for each ELU, JP-
ELU, RM-ELU, and SM-ELU, in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Jack Pine ELU
If OBL > 2% and UPL < 54% then Group 1
and UPL > 54% then Group 2
If OBL < 2% and UPL > 54% then Group 2
and UPL < 54% and FACU < 26% then Group 1
and UPL < 54% and FACU > 26% then Group 2

Red Maple ELU
If OBL > 4% and UPL < 27% then Group 1
and UPL > 27% then Group 2
If OBL < 4% and FACW < 3% then Group 2

and FACW > 3% and UPL < 27% then Group 1
and FACW > 3% and UPL > 27% then Group 2

 

 

 

Sugar Maple ELU
If OBL > 6% and UPL < 30% then Group 1
and UPL > 30% then Group 2
If OBL < 6% and FACW > 50% then Group 1
and FACW < 50% then Group 2

 

Table 10. Examples of transect riparian (R) and upland (U) zone delineations for
ELUs in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001.

 

Example 1 Examgle 2 Examgle 3 Examgle 4 Examgle 5
Plot# Group Zone Group Zone Group Zone Group Zone Group Zone

 

1 1 R 1 R 2 R 2 U 2 R
2 1 R 1 R 1 R 2 U 2 R
3 2 R 2 U 2 U 1 U 1 R
4 1 R 2 U 2 U 2 U 1 R
5 2 U 1 U 2 U 2 U 2 U
6 2 U 2 U 2 U 2 U 2 U
7 2 U 2 U 2 U 2 U 2 U
8 2 U 2 U 2 U 2 U 2 U
9 2 U 2 U 2 U 2 U 2 U
10 2 U 2 U 2 U 2 U 2 U
11 2 U 2 U 2 U 2 U
12 2 U 2 U 2 U
13 2 U

 

43

RIU Community Composition

The R and U zones in each ELU were delineated based on percent
herbaceous species WIS, which are effected by environmental conditions,
ecological processes and biotic communities. These conditions not only affect
the herbaceous floral community but the entire plant community and the
vertebrate community. The vegetation and vertebrate community composition
within the R and U zones are described and compared for each ELU.
Vegetation community
iii-i1

Based on several %WIS grouping rules (refer to Table 9), all JP-ELU plots
were identified as either riparian (R) or upland (U). The box and whisker
distribution plots for herbaceous species’ WIS within the R and U zones of JP-
ELU are shown in Figure 6. All WIS variables are significantly different between
the two zones (Table 11). Mean WIS %FACW and %OBL are near zero in the U
zone—much less than in the R zone. Conversely, mean %UPL is 60%—

significantly greater than the R zone.

44

 

% WIS for 3 zone in JP-ELU

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

100
so - i
60 i
40 - _1_ .
T I;
”fair—:5 @lfllol ‘DM...
0 t _J_ —-l— _L__ ‘ D :80
-2o - - - ‘ - - I £1.96'SD
% FAC % FACU % FACW % OBL % UPL % NI
% wrs for _u_ zone in JP-ELU
100 . . .
80 l
60 i u
40 I _l_ i
E]
20 i .
» —I— _c._ i. a Mean
0 ti fl [:1 ,SD
-20 . . I :t1.96‘SD

 

 

% FAC % FACU % FACW % OBL % UPL % NI

 

 

 

Figure 6. Box and whisker plot of percent herbaceous wetland indicator status
(WIS) for riparian (R) and upland (U) ecological zones of JP-ELU sites, in
northern Lower Michigan, 2000 and 2001.

Table 11. Comparison of percent herbaceous wetland indicator status (WIS)
between riparian (R) and upland (U) ecological zones of JP-ELU sites, in
northern Lower Michigan, 2000 and 2001.

 

 

R (n=34) U (n=217)
Variable Mean Std.Dev. Mean Std.Dev.
% FAC“ 15.64 5.95 2.34 3.76
% FACU‘ 15.19 10.17 27.29 13.90
% FACW“ 10.03 6.99 0.13 1.02
% OBL” 16.99 10.23 0.01 0.17
% UPL’ 16.72 11.11 59.90 15.10
% Nl‘ 25.43 9.01 10.33 6.32

 

* Denotes significant difference between riparian (R) and upland (U) zones (T -test, p <0.10).

45

The constancy of occurrence (percent of plots with species present) of
herbaceous species within the JP-ELU R zone and U zone are compared in
Table 12. The R zone contained 139 identified herbaceous species, 95 (68%) of
which were unique to the R zone and not found in the U zone. In comparison,
the U zone had 59 species, 15 (25%) of which were not found in the R zone.
Table 13 compares the constancy of occurrence of small woody species within
the JP-ELU R and U zones. The R zone included a total of 35 small woody
species, 21 (60%) of which were not found in the U zone. The U zone had 18
species, 4 (22%) of which were not found in the R zone. Table 14 compares the
constancy of occurrence of tree species between the R and U zones within JP-
ELU. The R zone had 8 tree species, 3 (38%) species unique to the R zone.
The U zone had 7 species, 2 (29%) of which were not found in the R zone. The
R zone consistently has higher species richness than the U zone in all vegetation

categories with a higher proportion of those species unique to the riparian zone.

46

Table 12. Herbaceous species constancy of occurrence (percent of plots with
species present) within riparian (R) and upland (U) ecological zones of JP-ELU
sites, in northern Lower Michigan, 2000 and 2001.

 

 

Species Common Name R U

Achillea millefolium common yarrow 0.7 0.0
Adiantum aleuticum maidenhair fern 0.7 0.0
Agrastis gigantea redtop 2.9 0.0
Agrostis hyemalis winter bentgrass 2.9 0.0
Anemone canadensis Canadian anemone 11.8 0.0
Anemone quinquefolia nig htcaps 8.8 0.0
Anemone virginiana tall thimbleweed 0.7 0.0
Antennan’a neglecta field pussytoes 0.7 0.3
Apocynum Xflan'bundum dogbane 0.0 1.0
Aquilegia canadensis red columbine 3.7 0.0
Arctostaphylas uva-ursi kinnikinnick 0.0 11.9
An'saema tn'phyllum Jack in the pulpit 2.9 0.0
Aster spp aster spp 43.4 4.1
Athyn’um filix-femina common ladyfem 9.6 0.0
Avena fatua wild oat 3.7 1.4
Blephilia ciliata downy pagoda-plant 3.7 0.0
Brachyelytrum erectum bearded shorthusk 21.3 0.1
Bramus ciliatus fringed brome 0.0 0.1
Bryophyte spp moss spp 1.5 0.0
Calamagostis canadensis bluejoint 8.8 0.0
Caltha palustn's yellow marsh marigold 2.9 0.0
Campanula aparinaides pursh marsh bellflower 2.2 0.0
Campanula rotundifolia bluebell bellflower 2.2 0.1
Carex aurea golden sedge 0.7 0.0
Carex bebbii Bebb's sedge 0.7 0.0
Carex castanea chestnut sedge 5.1 0.0
Carex ebumea bristleleaf sedge 0.7 0.0
Carex flava yellow sedge 11.8 0.0
Carex farmasa handsome sedge 0.7 0.0
Carex g’acillima graceful sedge 44.9 0.0
Carex ganularis limestone meadow sedge 5.1 0.0
Carex hystericina bottlebrush sedge 0.7 0.0
Carex interior inland sedge 0.7 0.0
Carex intumescens greater bladder sedge 2.2 0.0
Carex Ieptalea bristlystalked sedge 10.3 0.0
Carex Iupulina hop sedge 5.9 0.1
Carex magellanica boreal bog sedge 0.7 0.0
Carex pensylvanica Pennsylvania sedge 19.9 80.4
Carex plantaginea plantainleaf sedge 1.5 0.0
Carex prasina drooping sedge 0.7 0.0
Carex rastrata beaked sedge 6.6 0.0
Carex scabrata eastern rough sedge 1.5 0.0
Carex scapan'a broom sedge 0.7 0.0
Carex stipata owlfruit sedge 4.4 0.0
Carex stricta upright sedge 8.1 0.0
Cimicifuga racemosa black cohosh 1.5 0.0

 

47

Table 12 (cont’d).

 

 

Species Common Name R U

Cinna latifolia drooping woodreed 4.4 0.0
Cirsium spp thistle spp 1.5 0.0
Cladina mitis blue cladonia 0.7 52.5
Cladina rangifen‘na greygreen reindeer lichen 2.2 68.9
Cladonia cristatella cup lichen 0.7 7.4
Clematis occidentalis westem blue virginsbower 20.6 0.0
Clintonia umbellulata white clintonia 0.7 0.0
Comptonia peregina sweet fem 3.7 13.2
Convolvulus arvensis field bindweed 0.0 0.1
Captis tn'falia goldthread 2.9 0.1
Camus canadensis bunchbeny dogwood 2.9 0.0
Crepis capillaris smooth hawksbeard 0.0 0.3
Cypripedium spp lady's slipper spp 1.5 0.3
Danthania spicata poverty oatgrass 7.4 19.7
Deschampsia flexuosa wavy hairgrass 10.3 14.9
Dichanthelium depauperatum starved panicgrass 2.2 2.0
Dichanthelium Iinearifolium slimleaf panicgrass 6.6 1.7
Dryapten's baattii Boott's fern 3.7 0.0
Dryapten’s carthusiana spinulose woodfem 1.5 0.0
Elymus hystrix eastern bottlebrush grass 3.7 0.0
Elymus repens quackg rass 2.2 0.1
Elymus trachycaulus slender wheatgrass 5.9 0.6
Elymus virginicus Virginia wildrye 14.7 0.0
Epigaea repens trailing arbutus 9.6 2.6
Equisetum fluviatile water horsetail 0.7 0.0
Erigeron pulchellus robin plantain 0.0 1.3
Eupatorium purpureum sweetscented joepyeweed 0.7 0.0
Euphorbia esula leafy spurge 0.7 0.1
Festuca subverticillata nodding fescue 0.7 0.0
Fragan'a spp strawbeny spp 22.1 0.1
Galium asprellum rough bedstraw 40.4 0.0
Galium odoratum sweet scented bedstraw 1.5 0.0
Gaulthen'a procumbens eastern teabeny 1 5.4 10.6
Gaylussacia baccata black hucklebeny 5.1 15.0
Geum Iaciniatum rough avens 6.6 0.0
Glyceria striata fowl mannagrass 14.7 0.0
Helianthemum bicknellii hoary frostweed 0.0 0.3
Hieracium caespitasum meadow hawkweed 0.7 1.0
Hieracium canadense Canada hawkweed 0.0 0.6
Hieracium spp hawkweed spp 2.9 2.0
Hieracium venosum rattlesnake weed 0.7 2.4
Hydrocatyle americana American marshpennywort 2.2 0.0
Hypericum perforatum common St. johnswort 1.5 0.0
Impatiens capensis jewelweed 2.2 0.0
ms versicalar blue flag 4.4 0.0
Lactuca sem’ala prickly lettuce 8.8 0.0
Lycopodium spp clubmoss spp 2.2 0.5
Lycopus americanus American water horehound 9.6 0.0
Lycopus uniflarus bugleweed 13.2 0.0
Lysimachia ciliata fringed loosestrife 4.4 0.0

 

48

Table 12 (cont’d).

 

 

Species Common Name R U

Maianthemum canadense Canada mayflower 36.0 4.0
Medeala virginiana Indian cucumber 0.0 0.1
Melampyrum Iineare narrowleaf cowwheat 5.1 7.0
Melica smithii Smith's melicgrass 0.7 0.0
Milium efiusum American milletgrass 0.7 0.0
Mitchel/a repens partridgebeny 1.5 0.2
MiteIIa diphylla twoleaf miterwort 1.5 0.0
Mite/Ia nude naked mittenNort 4.4 0.0
Muhlenbergia glamerata spiked muhly 5.1 0.0
Myasatis scarpiaides true forget me not 0.7 0.0
Nepeta catan‘a catnip 0.7 0.0
Onoclea sensibilis sensitive fern 8.8 0.0
Oryzopsis aspen'falia roughleaf ricegrass 8.8 1.4
Osmunda cinnamomea cinnamon fern 4.4 0.0
Osmunda regalis royal fern 1.5 0.0
Packera obavata round leaved ragwort 4.4 0.0
Panicum spp panicum spp 5.9 0.3
Phalaris arundinacea reed canarygrass 2.2 0.0
Piptatherum pungens mountain ricegrass 5.9 39.6
Poa palustn's fowl bluegrass 3.7 0.0
Polygala paucifolia gaywings 1.5 0.3
Polygala palygama racemed milkwort 0.0 0.5
Polygonatum spp Solomon's seal spp 4.4 0.0
Potentilla simplex common cinquefoil 2.2 0.0
Prenanthes alba white rattlesnakeroot 1.5 0.0
Prune/Ia vulgaris common selfheal 2.9 0.0
Prunus pumila sand cheny 2.9 9.3
Pten’dium aquilinum bracken fern 22.8 31.7
Ranunculus abortivus littleleaf buttercup 0.7 0.0
Ranunculus hispidus bristly buttercup 0.7 0.0
Ranunculus pensylvanicus Pennsylvania buttercup 2.9 0.0
Rubus spp blackberry/raspbeny spp 45.6 0.3
Sanicula odorata black snakeroot 0.7 0.0
Schizachne purpurascens false melic 0.0 1.8
Schaenaplectus americanus chairmaker‘s bulrush 2.2 0.0
Scutellaria galen'culata marsh skullcap 6.6 0.0
Scutellan'a laten’flara blue skullcap 3.7 0.0
Sibbaldiapsis tridentata shrubby fivefingers 0.0 0.8
Smilax tamnoides bristly greenbrier 2.9 0.0
Solidago spp goldenrod spp 37.5 2.1
Sarghastrum nutans indiangrass 0.0 4.6
Sphagnum spp sphagnum moss spp 48.5 46.8
Sphenopholis intennedia slender wedgescale 0.0 0.1
Taraxacum afiicinale common dandelion 2.9 0.0
Thalictrum dioicum eariy meadow rue 2.9 0.0
Thalictrum pubescens king of the meadow 48.5 0.0
Thalictrum thalictroides rue anemone 0.7 0.0
Taxicodendran radicans poison ivy 3.7 0.0
Triadenum virginicum Virginia marsh St Johnswort 0.7 0.0
Trientalis barealis starflower 8.1 1.4

 

49

Table 12 (cont’d).

 

 

Species Common Name R U

Trillium cemuum whip-poor-will flower 0.7 0.0
Trillium undulatum painted trillium 2.2 0.0
Unknown spp 13.2 0.9
Urtica dioica stinging nettle 0.7 0.0
Vaccinium angustifolium bluebeny 25.7 79.7
Vaccinium carymbasum highbush blueberry 0.0 0.6
Vicia spp vetch spp 0.7 0.0
Viola spp violet spp 48.5 1.4
Total number of species 139 59

 

50

Table 13. Small woody (diameter <10 cm) species constancy of occurrence
within riparian (R) and upland (U) ecological zones of JP-ELU sites, in northern
Lower Michigan, 2000 and 2001.

 

 

Species Common Name R U

Abies balsamea balsam fir 18.2 1.0
Acer rubrum red maple 22.7 17.0
Alnus rugosa speckled alder 77.3 0.0
Amelanchier spp junebeny spp 40.9 36.4
Betula pumila swamp birch 4.5 0.0
Camus sen‘cea red osier dogwood 36.4 1.0
Camus spp dogwood spp 59.1 0.5
Crataegus spp hawthorn spp 9.1 1.5
Dasiphara flaribunda shmbby cinquefoil 9.1 0.0
Kalmia palifalia pale laural 4.5 0.0
Larix Iaricina tamarack 4.5 0.0
Lanicera hirsuta hairy honeysuckle 27.3 0.0
Lanicera ablangifalia swamp fly honeysuckle 9.1 0.0
Lanicera spp honeysuckle spp 22.7 0.0
Physacarpus apulifalius ninebark 40.9 0.0
Picea pungens blue spruce 9.1 0.0
Pinus banksiana jack pine 0.0 57.3
Pinus resinasa red pine 0.0 12.1
Pinus strobus white pine 9.1 11.2
Papulus balsamifera balsam poplar 4.5 0.0
Papulus grandidentata bigtooth aspen 0.0 0.5
Papulus tremuloides quaking aspen 22.7 0.5
Prunus pensylvanica pin cherry 0.0 2.4
Prunus serotina black cheny 54.5 45.6
Prunus spp cheny spp 9.1 0.0
Prunus virginiana choke cheny 68.2 3.4
Quercus alba white oak 4.5 12.6
Quercus rubra red oak 4.5 55.3
Rhamnus alnifalia alderleaf buckthom 50.0 0.0
Ribes hirteIIum smooth goosebeny 18.2 0.5
Ribes Iacustre bristly black currant 9.1 0.0
Ribes spp cu rrant spp 13.6 0.0
Rosa spp wild rose spp 27.3 0.5
Salix spp willow spp 4.5 0.0
Sambucus nigra common elderbeny 9.1 0.0
Spiraea alba narrow leaved meadow sweet 27.3 0.0
Unknown spp 22.7 0.0
Wbumum apulus cranbeny vibumum 50.0 0.0
Vibumum spp vibumum spp 4.5 0.0
Total number of species 35 18

 

51

Table 14. Large woody (DBH >10 cm) species constancy of occurrence within
riparian (R) and upland (U) ecological zones of JP-ELU sites, in northern Lower
Michigan, 2000 and 2001.

 

 

Species Common Name R U

Abies balsamea balsam fir 18.2 0.0
Acer rubrum red maple 9.1 5.6
Larix Ian'cina tamarack 9.1 0.0
None none 36.4 2.8
Pinus banksiana jack pine 18.2 86.0
Picea pungens blue spruce 18.2 0.0
Pinus resinasa red pine 9.1 27.1
Pinus strabus white pine 9.1 6.5
Prunus serotina black cheny 0.0 3.7
Quercus rubra red oak 0.0 9.3
Total number of species 8 7

 

The average number of herbaceous species per plot and the average
percent cover of vegetation cover variables (measured at every vegetation plot)
are compared in Table 15. Within the JP-ELU sites, a total of 34 plots were
delineated within the R zone and 217 plots within the U zone. The number of
herbaceous species, percent herbaceous cover, understory cover, and graminoid
cover were all significantly greater in the R zone. Average percent bareground

was significantly less within the R zone.

52

Table 15. Comparison of the number of herbaceous species per vegetation plot
and average percent cover variable means between riparian (R) and upland (U)
ecological zones of JP-ELU sites, in northern Lower Michigan, 2000 and 2001.

 

 

Variable Mean Std.Dev. Mean Std.Dev.
# Herbaceous Species" 39.35 12.54 22.09 5.48
% Herbaceous Cover‘ 56.38 18.94 29.28 14.26
% Understory Cover‘ 46.83 25.48 9.59 11.17
% Overstory Cover 44.26 31.47 42.48 21.38
% Graminoid Cover‘ 33.57 15.43 17.90 11.94
% Forb Cover 28.36 12.05 26.40 14.69
% Bareground" 19.50 16.59 54.22 16.64

 

*Denotes significant difference between riparian ® and upland (U) zones (T -test, p <0.10).

Small woody, tree, and coarse woody debrislstumplsnag variables are
compared between the R and U zones in Table 16. These variables were
measured at every other vegetation plot. For JP-ELU sites, 11 of these plots
were delineated within the R zone and 107 within the U zone. The average
number of small woody stems, both less than and greater than 1 m in height, and
small woody species diversity were all significantly greater in the R zone. The
average total number of trees was significantly lower in the R zone than the U
zone, however, total tree basal area and tree species diversity were not
significantly different between the R and U zones within the JP-ELU sites. The
average number of coarse woody debris objects and number of stumps were
significantly more within the R zone, but average total volume of both coarse

woody debris and stumps were not significantly different between the two zones.

53

Table 16. Comparison of small woody (diameter <10 cm), tree (DBH >10 cm),
and coarse woody debrislsnaglstump variables between riparian (R) and upland
(U) ecological zones of JP-ELU sites, in northern Lower Michigan, 2000 and
2001.

 

 

R (n=1 1) U (n=107)
Variable Mean Std.Dev. Mean Std.Dev.
# Small Woody Stems >1m height* 80.82 43.05 3.35 4.71
# Small Woody Stems <1m height* 268.00 147.85 32.14 70.37
Small Woody Species Diversity" 10.27 2.72 3.50 1.66
# Trees" 1.64 2.87 5.66 3.04
Total Tree Basal Area 0.1 1 0.23 1 .87 17.89
Tree Sp Diversity 1.27 0.90 1.33 0.63
# Coarse Woody Debris Objects" 3.82 4.17 1.02 1.30
# Snags 0.18 0.60 0.33 0.95
# Stumps* 0.82 1.25 0.33 0.64
Total Debris Volume 36.17 47.45 31.98 188.76
Total Snag Volume 3.03 10.05 6.07 20.57
Total Stump Volume 1.53 2.19 1.16 5.31

 

*Denotes significant difference between riparian ® and upland (U) zones (T -test, p <0.10).

RM-ELU

Based on the %WIS grouping rules (refer to Table 9), all RM-ELU plots
were identified as either riparian ® or upland (U). The box and whisker plots for
herbaceous species WIS within the RM-ELU R and U zones are shown in Figure
7. All WIS variables are significantly different between the two zones (Table 17).
Mean %FACW and %OBL are near zero in the U zone, significantly less than the

R zone, while mean %FACU and %UPL are significantly greater than within the

R zone.

54

 

 

i % WIS for _R_ zone '0 RM—ELU

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

100
80 -
60 -
40 - —T— T _T— <
20 . [3:] D D U
_ U I? l 0 Mean
0 i: I —1— ‘ (:1 :SD
-20 . ‘ ‘ . ‘ + I t1.96‘SD
% FAC % FACU % FACW % OBL % UPL % Nl
% WIS for _U_ zone 'n RM—ELU
100 . . . . . .
80 - I
60 ~ I
40 - '3 n .
20 hi Ed
D Mean
0 . —l— rir IE2 I . [:1 :80
-2o - . . - - ' I :t1.96"SD
% FAC % FACU % FACW % OBL % UPL % NI

 

Figure 7. Box and whisker plot of percent herbaceous wetland indicator status
(WIS) for riparian (R) and upland (U) ecological zones of RM-ELU sites, in
northern Lower Michigan, 2000 and 2001.

Table 17. Comparison of percent herbaceous wetland indicator status (WIS)
between riparian (R) and upland (U) ecological zones of RM-ELU sites, in
northern Lower Michigan, 2000 and 2001.

 

 

R (n=54) U (n=183)
Variable Mean Std.Dev. Mean Std.Dev.
% FAC‘ 18.10 9.02 13.59 10.06
% FACU“ 11.65 14.08 43.38 21.29
% FACW‘ 12.48 7.69 0.80 2.87
% OBL* 18.71 13.80 0.58 2.03
% UPL“ 13.87 9.17 30.08 18.37
% Nl* 25.19 11.00 11.49 9.62

 

*Denotes significant difference between riparian ® and upland (U) zones (T -test, p <0.10).

55

 

The constancy of occurrence of herbaceous species within the RM-ELU R
and U zones are compared in Table 18. The R zone contained 170 herbaceous
species, 80 (47%) of which were unique to the R zone. In comparison, the U
zone had 124 species, 34 (27%) of which were not found in the R zone. Table
19 compares the constancy of occurrence of small woody species within the RM-
ELU R and U zones. The R zone included a total of 41 small woody species, 10
(24%) of which were not found in the U zone. The U zone had 38 species, 7
(17%) of which were not found in the R zone. Table 20 compares the constancy
of occurrence of tree species between the R and U zones within RM-ELU. The R
zone had 15 tree species, 3 (20%) species unique to the R zone. The U zone
had 16 species, 4 (25%) of which were not found in the R zone. The R zone had
higher herbaceous species richness than the U zone, a greater proportion of

which were unique to the R zone. Shrub and tree species richness are more

comparable between the two zones.

 

Table 18. Herbaceous species constancy of occurrence within riparian (R) and

upland (U) ecological zones of RM-ELU sites, in northern Lower Michigan, 2000

 

 

and 2001.
Species Common Name R U
Ammonia rastellata agrimony 1.9 1.5
Agrostis gigantea redtop 6.0 0.0
Agostis hyemalis winter bentgrass 0.0 0.5
Allium spp onion spp 4.2 0.4
Amphicarpaea bracteata American hogpeanut 0.5 0.0
Andropagan gerardii big bluestem 0.0 0.3
Anemone canadensis Canadian anemone 5.1 0.4
Anemone quinquefolia nig htcaps 13.0 7.5
Antennan’a neglecta field pussytoes 1.9 0.3
Apocynum flon'bundum dogbane 0.0 0.7
Aquilegia canadensis red columbine 0.0 0.1
Aralia nudicaulis wild sarsparilla 1.9 0.0
Arctastaphylas uva-ursi kinnikinnick 1.9 1.5
Arisaema tn’phyllum Jack in the pulpit 5.6 0.1
Asclepias incamata swamp milkweed 0.9 0.0
Asclepias spp milkweed spp 2.3 0.3
Asclepias syriaca common milkweed 0.0 0.1
Asplenium spp spleenwort spp 2.3 0.0
Aster spp aster spp 80.1 1 1 .3
Athyn'um filix-femina common ladyfem 24.5 0.1
Avena fatua wild cat 0.0 1.8
Bidens spp beggarticks spp 0.5 0.0
Blephilia ciliata downy pagoda-plant 11.1 0.0
Brachyelyvum erectum bearded shorthusk 31.0 13.9
Bramus ciliatus fringed brome 1.9 0.5
Bramus spp bromus spp 0.5 0.0
Bramus tectorum cheatgrass 0.9 0.1
Bryaphyte spp moss spp 0.0 0.3
Calamagrostis canadensis bluejoint 11.6 0.5
Caltha palustris yellow marsh marigold 7.4 0.0
Campanula aparinaides pursh marsh bellflower 0.9 0.0
Campanula rotundifolia bluebell bellflower 0.5 0.7
Carex albursina white bear sedge 0.9 0.0
Carex arctata drooping woodland sedge 0.9 0.0
Carex bebbii Bebb’s sedge 2.8 0.0
Carex crinita fringed sedge 1.9 0.0
Carex disperrna soflleaf sedge 5.1 0.0
Carex flava yellow sedge 14.4 0.4
Carex farmasa handsome sedge 1.4 0.0
Carex g'acillima graceful sedge 11.1 0.4
Carex hystericina bottlebrush sedge 2.8 0.0
Carex interior inland sedge 20.4 0.0
Carex intumescens greater bladder sedge 5.1 0.5
Carex Iaxiculmis spreading sedge— 2.3 0.7

 

57

 

Table 18 (cont’d).

 

 

Species Common Name R U
Carex Iaxitlara broad looseflower sedge 18.5 3.8
Carex Ieptalea bristlystalked sedge 7.4 0.1
Carex Ieptanervia nerveless woodland sedge 0.9 0.3
Carex pedunculata longstalk sedge 0.9 0.0
Carex pellita woolly sedge 8.3 0.0
Carex pensylvanica Pennsylvania sedge 10.2 35.5
Carex plantaginea plantainleaf sedge 6.5 6.0
Carex retrarsa knotsheath sedge 0.9 0.0
Carex rostrate beaked sedge 2.3 0.0
Carex rugosperma parachute sedge 2.8 25.1
Carex scapan'e broom sedge 7.9 0.1
Carex spp carex spp 0.5 0.3
Carex sprengelii Sprengel's sedge 1.4 0.0
Carex stipeta owlfruit sedge 2.3 0.0
Carex stn'cta upright sedge 4.2 0.0
Carex tn'sperma threeseeded sedge 1.9 0.8
Caulophyllum the/iatroides blue cohosh 0.5 0.0
Chelone glabra turtle head 0.5 0.0
Cicuta bulbifera bulb bearing water hemlock 0.9 0.0
Cicuta maculata spotted water hemlock 0.5 0.0
Cinna latifolia drooping woodreed 5.1 1.0
Circaea alpina small enchanters nightshade 7.9 0.0
Cirsium spp thistle spp 5.6 0.0
Cladina mitis blue cladonia 0.9 4.0
Cladina rangiferina greygreen reindeer lichen 0.5 5.7
Cladonia cristatella cup lichen 4.2 4.4
Clematis occidentalis western blue virginsbower 2.3 0.0
Clinapadium vulgare wild basil 5.6 2.0
Clintonia umbellulata white clintonia 2.8 0.4
Coeloglossum viride longbract frog orchid 0.5 0.4
Comptonia peregrine sweet fern 0.0 6.8
Convolvulus arvensis field bindweed 1.4 0.7
Captis tn'falia goldthread 26.4 0.0
Camus canadensis bunchbeny dogwood 28.2 1.6
Crepis capillaris smooth hawksbeard 0.0 0.1
Cryptoteenia canadensis Canadian honewort 7.4 0.5
Cypripedium an'etinum ram’s head lady’s slipper 0.0 0.1
Cypripedium spp lady's slipper spp 0.9 0.1
Dactylis glamerate orchardgrass 0.0 0.4
Dalibarda repens robin runaway 0.0 0.1
Danthania spicata poverty oatg rass 2.3 10.8
Deschampsia flexuasa wavy hairgrass 1.4 6.3
Dichanthelium depauperatum starved panicgrass 0.0 1.4
Dichanthelium Iatifalium broadleaf rosette grass 3.7 1.8
Dichanthelium Iinearifolium slimleaf panicgrass 0.0 1.1
Dichanthelium xanthophysum slender roseete grass 0.5 0.1
Dryopten's carthusiena spinulose woodfem 8.8 0.4
Eleacheris rastellata beaked spikerush 0.9 0.0

 

58

Table 18 (cont’d).

 

 

Species Common Name R U
Elymus repens quackgrass 1.9 0.0
Elymus trachycaulus slender wheatgrass 0.0 0.4
Elymus virginicus Virginia wildrye 3.7 0.0
Epigaea repens trailing arbutus 0.9 2.9
Epilobium ciliatum fringed willowherb 1.9 0.0
Equisetum fluviatile water horsetail 33.8 0.0
Equisetum hyemale scouringrush horsetail 0.5 0.0
Eupatorium purpureum sweetscented joepyeweed 2.8 0.0
Fragan'a spp strawbeny spp 23.1 4.8
Galium asprellum rough bedstraw 26.9 0.5
Galium odoratum sweet scented bedstraw 16.7 3.7
Geulthen'a hispidula creeping snowberry 3.7 0.0
Gaulthen’a pracumbens eastem teabeny 2.8 26.8
Geylussacie baccata black huckleberry 7.4 13.9
Genista tincton‘a dyers greenweed 0.0 0.3
Geum Ieciniatum rough avens 0.9 0.0
Glyceria canadensis rattlesnake mannagrass 2.3 0.0
Glyceria striata fowl mannagrass 19.0 1.2
Gymnacarpium dryapten‘s western oakfem 8.8 0.0
Halenia deflexa American spurred gentian 0.5 0.0
Helianthus divan’cetus woodland sunflower 0.5 0.0
Hepatice nobilis var. obtuse round lobed hepatica 3.2 1.4
Hieracium caespitasum meadow hawkweed 0.5 1.5
Hieracium spp hawkweed spp 15.3 5.3
Hieracium venosum rattlesnake weed 0.5 0.5
Hydrocotyle americana American marshpennywort 0.5 0.0
Hypericum perfaretum common St. johnswort 0.0 1.0
Impatiens capensis jewelweed 8.8 0.0
In's versicalar blue flag 0.5 0.0
Juncus tenuis poverty msh 0.5 0.1
Kaelen’e macrantha prairie junegrass 0.0 1.8
Lactuca sem’ola prickly lettuce 0.5 0.0
Lactuca taterica blue lettuce 0.5 1.1
Lapsana communis common nipplewort 0.5 0.0
Leersia aryzaides rice cutgrass 1.9 0.0
Linnaea barealis twinflower 8.3 3.6
Lycopodium spp clubmoss spp 1.9 3.3
Lycopus americanus American water horehound 0.9 0.0
L ycopus uniflorus bugleweed 18.5 0.0
Lysimachia ciliata fringed loosestrife 2.8 0.1
Lysimachia terrestris earth loosestrife 3.2 0.0
Maianthemum canadense Canada mayflower 49.5 31.0
Matteuccie struthiapteris ostrich fern 0.5 0.0
Melampyrum Iineare narrowleaf cowwheat 3.2 6.8
Melica smithii Smith’s melicgrass 2.3 0.0
Milium effusum American milletgrass 0.0 0.3
Mitchel/a repens partridgebeny 9.3 4.4
Mitella diphylla twoleaf miterwort 5.6 0.7

59

Table 18 (cont’d).

 

 

Species Common Name R U
Mitella nude naked mitterwort 25.9 0.5
Nepeta catan'a catnip 0.5 0.0
None 0.0 0.1
Onoclea sensibilis sensitive fem 8.3 0.0
Oryzopsis aspen'falia roughleaf ricegrass 12.0 34.7
Osmamiza berteroi sweet cicely 0.0 1.1
Osmunda cinnamomea cinnamon fern 11.6 0.0
Osmunda claytoniane L mericanaL n fern 0.0 0.1
Osmunda regalis royal fern 3.7 0.0
Panicum capillare witchg rass 0.5 0.3
Pamassia pelustris grass of pamassus 3.2 0.0
Parthenacissus quinquefolia Virginia creeper 0.9 0.0
Pediculen's canadensis Canadian lousewort 0.9 1.8
Phalaris arundinacea reed canarygrass 3.2 0.0
Phleum pratense timothy 0.0 0.1
Pilea pumila Canadian clearweed 1.4 0.0
Piptatherum pungens mountain ricegrass 0.0 3.4
Pletanthera hyperborea northern green orchid 0.0 0.1
Poe palustn’s fowl bluegrass 2.3 0.3
Polygala paucifolia gaywings 11.6 5.2
Polygala palygema racemed milkwort 0.0 0.1
Polygonatum spp Solomon's seal spp 2.8 1.5
Polygonum scandens climbing false buckweat 0.5 0.0
Prenanthes alba white rattlesnakeroot 2.8 0.8
Prune/Ia vulgaris common selfheal 3.7 2.0
Prunus pumila sand cherry 0.0 0.3
Pten'dium aquilinum bracken fern 26.4 80.2
Pyrala americana American Wintergreen 10.2 2.2
Ranunculus hispidus bristly buttercup 0.0 0.8
Ranunculus recurvatus blisterwort 0.9 0.0
Ribes Iecustre bristly black currant 0.9 0.0
Rubus chamaemorus cloudbeny 0.5 0.0
Rubus spp blackbeny/raspberry spp 48.1 15.8
Rumex acetosella sheep sorrel 0.5 3.8
Rumex crispus curied dock 0.5 0.0
Rumex verticillatus swamp dock 1.9 0.0
Sagittaria latifolia broad leaved arrowhead 0.5 0.0
Sanicula odorata black snakeroot 0.5 0.1
Schizachne purpurascens false melic 0.0 1.1
Schizachyn'um scopen'um little bluestem 0.0 0.7
Scirpus cypen’nus woolgrass 3.2 0.0
Scutellen’e eIIiptica hairy skullcap 0.0 0.3
Scutellaria galen'culete marsh skullcap 6.5 0.1
Scutellen’a incana hoary skullcap 0.0 0.3
Scutellen’a Iaten‘flara blue skullcap 6.5 0.1
Solanum dulcamara bittersweet nightshade 1.4 0.0
Solidago spp goldenrod spp 20.8 0.7
Sphagnum spp sphaglum moss spp 55.6 31.8

 

60

Table 18 (cont’d).

 

 

Species Common Name R U
Sporobolus cryptendrus se nd dropseed 0.0 0.1
Taraxacum afiicinale common dandelion 1.4 0.8
Thalictrum dioicum early meadow rue 0.5 0.0
Thalicfium pubescens king of the meadow 3.7 0.0
Toxioadendron redicens poison ivy 10.6 0.5
Trientalis barealis starflower 29.2 19.7
Tn’falium spp clover spp 0.5 0.0
Trillium undulatum painted trillium 0.5 0.1
Typha spp cattail spp 0.5 0.0
Unknown spp 11.1 2.5
Vaccinium engustifolium bluebeny 22.7 64.5
Verbascum thapsus common mullein 0.0 0.1
Veronica anagallis-aquatica water speedwell 0.5 0.0
Veronica filifonnis threadstalk speedwell 0.5 0.0
Veronica afiicinalis common gypsyweed 0.5 0.5
Viola spp violet spp 36.6 4.0
Total number of species 170 124

 

61

Table 19. Small woody (diameter <10 cm) species constancy of occurrence
within riparian (R) and upland (U) ecological zones of RM-ELU sites, in northern
Lower Michigan, 2000 and 2001.

 

 

Species Common Name R U

Abies balsamea balsam fir 57.5 23.9

Acerrubrum red maple 75.0 88.0

Acer saccharum sugar maple 0.0 1.1

Alnus rugosa speckled alder 42.5 0.0

Amelanchier spp junebeny spp 62.5 86.4

Betula papyn’fera paper birch 2.5 1.1

Carpinus caroliniana ironwood 0.0 0.5

Camus altemifolia altemateleaf dogwood 7.5 0.5

Cory/us comuta beaked hazelnut 0.0 1.6

Camus spp dogwood spp 15.0 0.0

Camus sericea red osier dogwood 17.5 0.0
Crataegus spp hawthom spp 12.5 15.2

Fagus grandifolie American beech 5.0 8.7
Fraxinus pennsylvanice green ash 7.5 0.0
Hamamelis virginiana American witchhazel 0.0 10.9

Larix lan'cina tamarack 5.0 1.1
Lanicera hirsute hairy honeysuckle 7.5 0.5
Lanicera spp honeysuckle spp 42.5 14.7
Physocarpus apulifalius ninebark 5.0 0.0
Pinus banksiana jack pine 0.0 2.7
Picea glauca white spruce 2.5 3.3
F‘icea mariana black spruce 40.0 1.1
Picea pungens blue spruce 5.0 0.5
Pinus resinase red pine 2.5 7.6
Pinus strabes white pine 12.5 56.5
Papulus balsamifera balsam poplar 12.5 2.2
Papulus gandidentata bigtooth aspen 0.0 9.8
Papulus tremuloides quaking aspen 40.0 31.0
Prunus serotina black cheny 67.5 87.5
Prunus spp cherry spp 2.5 1.1
Prunus virginiana choke cheny 30.0 19.6
Ptelea trifaliata common haptree 2.5 0.0
Quercus alba white oak 2.5 31.5
Quercus rubra red oak 77.5 91.3
Rhamnus alnifalia alderteaf buckthom 25.0 0.0
Ribes cynasbati prickly goosebeny 7.5 2.7
Ribes Iacustre bristly black current 0.0 2.2
Rosa spp wild rose spp 2.5 1.1
Smilax tamnoides bristly greenbrier 2.5 0.0
777uja occidentalis arborvitae 25.0 1.6
r’ilia americana basswood 2.5 1.6
r'suga canadensis hemlock 107.5 79.9
Jlmus americana American elm 2.5 1.1
12.5 6.5

J n known spp

 

 

62

Table 19 (cont’d).

 

 

Species Common Name R U
Wbumum acen‘folium mapleleaf vibumum 2.5 1.1
Viburnum apulus cranberry vibumum 2.5 0.5
Viburnum rafinesquianum downy arrow wood 2.5 0.0
Vitis riparia riverbank grape 2.5 0.0
Total number of species 41 38

 

63

Table 20. Large woody (DBH >10 cm) species constancy of occurrence within
riparian (R) and upland (U) ecological zones of RM-ELU sites, in northern Lower
Michigan, 2000 and 2001.

 

 

Species Common Name R U

Abies balsamea balsam fir 40.0 7.6
Acer rubrum red maple 10.0 35.9
Acer saccharum sugar maple 5.0 2.2
Betula papyn'fera paper birch 10.0 3.3
Fraxinus pennsylvanice green ash 5.0 0.0
None none 0.0 6.5
Pinus banksiana jack pine 0.0 12.0
Picea mariana black spruce 20.0 0.0
Pinus resinose red pine 10.0 28.3
Pinus strabus white pine 20.0 43.5
Papulus balsamifera balsam poplar 5.0 3.3
Papulus grendidentate bigtooth aspen 15.0 17.4
Papulus tremuloides quaking aspen 25.0 25.0
Prunus serotina black cheny 0.0 3.3
Quercus alba white oak 0.0 9.8
Quercus rubra red oak 5.0 18.5
Thuja occidentalis arborvitae 40.0 2.2
Tilia americana basswood 5.0 0.0
Tsuga canadensis hemlock 25.0 ' 3.3
Total number of species 15 16

 

The average number of herbaceous species per plot and the average
percent cover for vegetation cover variables (measured at every vegetation plot)
are compared in Table 21. Within the RM-ELU sites, a total of 54 plots were
delineated within the R zone and 183 within the U zone. Number of herbaceous
species, percent herbaceous cover, understory cover, and graminoid cover were
all significantly greater in the R zone. Average percent bareground was

significantly less within the R zone.

64

Table 21. Comparison of the number of herbaceous species per vegetation plot
and average percent cover variable means between riparian (R) and upland (U)
ecological zones for RM-ELU sites, in northern Lower Michigan, 2000 and 2001.

 

 

R (n=54) U (n=183)
Variable Mean Std.Dev. Mean Std.Dev.
ff Herbaceous Species" 47.33 20.69 22.78 12.51
% Herb Cover‘ 52.43 25.00 41.24 19.38
% Understory Cover" 23.68 21.17 14.49 12.00
% Overstory Cover 59.50 23.88 62.28 23.21
% Graminoid Cover‘ 26.56 21.24 14.12 14.96
% Forb Cover 36.09 19.89 35.12 15.24
% Bareground" 36.65 21.11 45.00 17.80

 

* Denotes significant difference between riparian (R) and upland (U) zones (T -test, p <0.10).

Small woody, tree, and coarse woody debrislstumplsnag variables
(measured at every other vegetation plot) are compared between R and U zones
in Table 22. For RM-ELU sites, 20 of these plots were delineated within the R
zone and 92 within the U zone. The average number of small woody stems, both
less than and greater than 1 m in height, and small woody species diversity were
all significantly greater in the R zone. The average number of coarse woody
debris objects, snags, and stumps were significantly more within the R zone.
The average total volume of both coarse woody debris and stumps were
significantly greater in the R zone, however, total volume of snags was not

significantly different between the two zones.

65

Table 22. Comparison of small woody (diameter <10 cm), tree (DBH >10 cm),
and coarse woody debrislsnaglstump variables between riparian (R) and upland
(U) ecological zones for RM-ELU sites, in northern Lower Michigan, 2000 and
2001.

 

 

R (n=20) U (n=92)
Variable Mean Std.Dev. Mean Std.Dev.
# Small Woody Stems >1m height* 6.16 4.73 3.10 2.79
# Small Woody Stems <1m height* 14.40 6.86 12.04 3.62
Small Woody Species Diversity* 10.00 4.18 7.68 2.25
# Trees 5.80 3.72 5.45 3.50
Total Tree Basal Area 0.25 0.16 0.23 0.18
Tree Sp Diversity 2.40 1.05 2.15 1.19
# Coarse Woody Debris Objects" 8.70 4.32 2.91 2.73
# Snags“ 1.25 1.07 0.70 1.08
# Stumps" 2.35 2.23 1.00 1.27
Total Debris Volume* 198.98 153.43 57.25 78.27
Total Snag Volume 54.73 64.92 45.64 222.11
Total Stump Volume* 7.81 8.04 4.04 8.04

 

* Denotes significant difference between riparian (R) and upland (U) zones (T -test, p <0.10).

SM—ELU

Based on the %WIS grouping rules (refer to Table 9), SM-ELU plots were
identified as either riparian (R) or upland (U). The box and whisker plots for
herbaceous WIS within the R and U zones of SM-ELU are shown in Figure 8. All
WIS variables except %FAC are significantly different between the two zones
(Table 23). The most distinctive variables between the two zones are %OBL
(significantly greater in the R zone) and %UPL (significantly greater in the U

zone)

66

I: . I . I E
v \ filwinih Mahala nwm RIVA...‘ udfinrv Sam... \D

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

% WIS for_R_ zone in SM—ELU
100 . . .
80
60 - ——1—— —I_
40 r I ‘
T o' ; . cs: “ ‘
0 HI] IT] _L_ —I—— 0 Mean
-20 - 1 CI :80
.40 - - . . - . I 11.96*SD
% FAC % FACU % FACW % OBL % UPL % NI
% WIS forg zone in SM—ELU
100 . . . . . .
80 ~ .
60 I I I .
40 . I _T— D D .
20 » u n a .
0 ~ i] ‘ c1
I —1— I I Late"
40 1 . - s . - I :1 96"SD
% FAC % FACU % FACW % OBL % UPL % NI

 

 

Figure 8. Box and whisker plot of percent herbaceous wetland indicator status
(WIS) for riparian (R) and upland (U) ecological zones of SM-ELU sites, in
northern Lower Michigan, 2000 and 2001.

Table 23. Comparison of percent herbaceous wetland indicator status (WIS)
between riparian (R) and upland (U) ecological zones of SM-ELU sites, in
northern Lower Michigan, 2000 and 2001.

 

 

R (n=64) U (n=213)
Variable Mean Std.Dev. Mean Std.Dev.
% FAC 11.88 9.53 14.74 19.86
% FACU“ 9.89 11.88 15.86 15.20
% FACW‘ 22.34 18.58 10.15 20.19
% OBL* 22.28 15.73 2.05 5.11
% UPL“ 9.70 7.75 26.27 24.66
% Nl* 23.91 16.79 29.52 23.46

 

* Denotes significant difference between riparian (R) and upland (U) zones (T -test, p <0.10).

67

an

n/h

IAIII‘IIII

The constancy of occurrence of herbaceous species within the SM-ELU R
and U zones are compared in Table 24. The R zone contained 163 herbaceous
species, 79 (48%) of which were unique to the R zone. In comparison, the U
zone had 128 species, 44 (34%) of which were not found in the R zone. Table
25 compares the constancy of occurrence of small woody species within the SM-
ELU R and U zones. The R zone included a total of 55 small woody species, 15
(27%) of which were not found in the U zone. The U zone had 45 species, 5
(11%) of which were not found in the R zone. Table 26 compares the constancy
of occurrence of tree species between the R and U zones. The R zone had 19
tree species, 7 (37%) species unique to the R zone. The U zone had 16 species,
4 (25%) of which were not found in the R zone. The R zone consistently had
higher species richness than the U zone in all vegetation categories with a higher
proportion of those species unique to the riparian zone.

Table 24. Herbaceous species constancy of occurrence within riparian (R) and
upland (U) ecological zones of SM-ELU sites, in northern Lower Michigan, 2000

and 2001.

 

 

Species Common Name R U
Achillee millefolium common yarrow 0.8 0.0
Actaea pachypoda white banebeny 0.8 0.1
Adiantum aleuticum maidenhair fern 0.0 0.8
Agimania rastellata agrimony 0.8 0.7
Agastis gigantea redtop 3.9 0.0
Agostis hyemalis winter bentgrass 2.7 0.0
Agostis perennans upland bentgrass 0.0 0.1
Allium spp onion spp 0.4 0.6
Allium tricoccum wild leek 0.0 3.2
Amphicarpeea bracteata American hogpeanut 0.0 0.2
Anemone canadensis Canadian anemone 6.6 0.4
Anemone quinquefolia nig htca ps 0.4 1.8
Anemone virginiana tall thimbleweed 0.4 0.2
Antennen'a neglecta field pussytoes 0.0 0.4
Apocynum xtlon'bundum dogbane 2.7 2.5
Aralia nudicaulis wild sarsparilla 7.4 5.3

 

68

Table 24 (cont’d).

 

 

Species Common Name R U
Arctastaphylas uve-ursi kinnikinnick 0.0 0.6
Arenan’a serpyllifolia thymeleaf sandwort 0.0 0.2
Arisaema triphyllum Jack in the pulpit 5.1 0.1
Asclepias incamata swamp milkweed 0.4 0.0
Asclepias spp milkweed spp 0.0 0.2
Asplenium spp spleenwort spp 0.8 0.0
Aster spp aster spp 43.4 15.6
Athyn'um filix-femina common ladyfem 10.5 0.0
Barberea vulgaris garden yellowrocket 0.4 0.0
Blephilia ciliata downy pagoda-plant 2.3 0.0
Batrychium virginianum rattlesnake fern 0.0 0.8
Brachyelytrum erectum bearded shorthusk 4.7 0.8
Bromus ciliatus fringed brome 0.4 0.0
Bramus tectorum cheatgrass 0.4 0.0
Calemagostis canadensis bluejoint 21.1 1.2
Calamagrostis stricta northern reedgrass 0.8 0.0
Caltha palustn's yellow marsh marigold 5.9 0.0
Camassia soil/aides Atlantic camas 0.4 0.0
Campanula aparinaides pursh marsh bellflower 2.3 0.0
Carex albursina white bear sedge 4.7 1.9
Carex bebbii Bebb's sedge 9.4 1.4
Carex communis fibrousroot sedge 0.0 0.2
Carex cn‘nite fringed sedge 9.0 0.0
Carex cn'statella crested sedge 0.4 0.0
Carex deweyana dewey sedge 4.3 6.5
Carex dispenna softleaf sedge 0.4 0.0
Carex flava yellow sedge 2.3 0.0
Carex g’acillima graceful sedge 6.3 1.2
Carex hystericina bottlebrush sedge 1.2 0.0
Carex interior inland sedge 7.4 0.0
Carex intumescens greater bladder sedge 3.5 4.5
Carex Iaxiflora broad looseflower sedge 2.0 0.5
Carex Ieptalea bristlystalked sedge 6.6 2.8
Carex peckii Peck's sedge 0.0 1.9
Carex pedunculata longstalk sedge 1.6 1.8
Carex pensylvanica Pennsylvania sedge 0.0 1.5
Carex plantaginea plantainleaf sedge 7.0 4.0
Carex prasina drooping sedge 5.1 0.0
Carex projecta necklace sedge 6.3 0.0
Carex retrorse knotsheath sedge 2.0 0.0
Carex rosea rosy sedge 0.8 4.8
Carex rugospenna parachute sedge 0.0 2.6
Carex scaparie broom sedge 0.4 0.1
Carex sprengelii Sprengel's sedge 0.4 0.0
Carex stipata owlfruit sedge 12.9 0.0
Carex stricta upright sedge 1.6 0.0
Carex tenera quill sedge 0.0 0.2
Carex vulpinoidea fox sedge 4.3 0.0

69

Table 24 (cont’d).

 

 

Species Common Name R U
Caulophyllum thalictroides blue cohosh 0.0 0.2
Centeurium pulchellum branched centaury 0.0 0.1
Cerastium fontanum big chickweed 0.0 0.2
Chelone glabra turtle head 0.4 0.0
Cicuta bulbifera bulb bearing water hemlock 0.8 0.0
Cicuta maculata spotted water hemlock 0.4 0.0
Cinna latifolia drooping woodreed 5.9 0.9
Circaea alpine small enchanters nightshade 5.1 0.8
Cirsium spp thistle spp 2.3 0.0
Cladina rangiferina greygreen reindeer lichen 0.0 0.4
Cladonia cn'statelle cup lichen 0.0 0.6
Clematis occidentalis western blue virginsbower 18.4 0.4
Clinapadium vulgare wild basil 1.6 0.6
Convolvulus arvensis field bindweed 1.2 0.7
Captis trifolia goldthread 0.4 0.1
Camus canadensis bunchbeny dogwood 0.0 0.1
Crepis capillaris smooth hawksbeard 0.8 0.9
Cryptataenia canadensis Canadian honewort 3.9 0.1
Danthania spicata poverty oatg rass 1.2 5.3
Decodon verticillatus swamp loosestrife 0.4 0.0
Deschampsia flexuasa wavy hairgrass 0.8 1.5
Drosere rotundifolia round leaved sundew 0.4 0.0
Dryopten's baattii Boott's fern 0.4 0.1
Dryopten‘s carthusiana spinulose woodfem 24.2 8.9
Dryapten‘s marginalis marginal woodfem 0.0 0.6
Elymus trachyceulus slender wheatg rass 0.0 0.6
Elymus virginicus Virginia wildrye 7.8 0.4
Epigaea repens trailing arbutus 0.0 0.1
Epilobium ciliatum fringed willowherb 1.2 0.0
Epilobium Ieptaphyllum bog willowherb 1.2 0.0
Epipactis helleborine broadleaf helleborine 3.5 6.0
Equisetum fluvietile water horsetail 26.2 0.5
Equisetum hyemale scouringrush horsetail 7.0 0.0
Erigeron pulchellus robin plantain 0.0 0.6
Eriapharum viridican'natum thinleaf cottonsedge 1.2 0.0
Eupatorium fistulosum trumpetweed 2.7 0.0
Eupatorium perfolietum boneset 1.2 0.0
Eupatorium purpureum sweetscented joepyeweed 3.9 0.0
Euphorbia carol/eta flowering spurge 0.0 0.4
Festuca subverticillata nodding fescue 0.4 1.2
Fregan’a spp strawbeny spp 14.8 6.6
Galium asprellum rough bedstraw 15.6 1.5
Galium odoratum sweet scented bedstraw 5.5 2.1
Gaultherie hispidula creeping snowbeny 0.4 0.2
Gaulthen’e procumbens eastern teaberry 2.0 0.1
Geum aleppicum yellow avens 0.0 0.4
Geum Ieciniatum rough evens 4.7 0.1
Glyceria striata fowl mannaflss 25.4 1.4

 

70

Table 24 (cont’d).

 

 

Species Common Name R U
Gymnocarpium dryapteris western oakfem 1.6 0.0
Hepatica nobilis var. acute sharp lobed hepatica 0.0 1.3
Hepatica nobilis var. obtuse round lobed hepatica 0.0 0.2
Hieracium caespitosum meadow hawkweed 0.4 0.1
Hieracium spp hawkweed spp 8.2 8.0
Hydrocatyle americana American marshpennywort 4.3 0.0
Hypericum perforatum common St. johnswort 0.0 0.1
Impatiens capensis jewelweed 11.7 0.0
Iris versicolar blue flag 0.8 0.0
Justicia americana American water-willow 0.4 0.0
Lactuca hirsute hairy lettuce 0.0 0.1
Laportea canadensis Canadian woodnettle 0.4 0.0
Leersia aryzoides rice cutg rass 4.7 0.0
Lilium spp lily spp 0.0 0.1
Linnaea barealis twinflower 1.6 0.1
Listera spp twayblade spp 1.6 0.0
Lobelia cardinalis cardinal flower 3.9 0.0
Lycopodium spp clubmoss spp 3.9 12.7
Lycopus americanus American water horehound 5.5 0.0
Lycopus uniflorus bugleweed 18.8 0.1
Lysimachia ciliata fringed loosestrife 1.6 0.0
Lysimachia terrestn's earth loosestrife 0.4 0.0
Maianthemum canadense Canada mayflower 7.0 15.3
Metteuccia struthiopten’s ostrich fern 1.6 0.0
Medeala virginiana Indian cucumber 0.8 6.3
Melanthium virginicum Virginia bunchflower 0.4 0.0
Melica smithii Smith's melicgrass 0.0 0.2
Mentha arvensis wild mint 0.4 0.0
Mentha pipen‘ta peppermint 10.2 0.0
Milium effusum American milletgrass 1.6 2.7
Mitchel/a repens partridgebeny 0.4 1.1
Mite/Ia diphylla twoleaf miterwort 3.5 0.2
Mite/Ia nude naked mittenNort 7.8 0.1
Monerda fistulosa wild bergamont 0.4 1.1
Muhlenbergia glamerata spiked muhly 0.8 0.0
Muhlenbergia mexicana Mexican muhly 0.4 0.0
Nepeta catan‘a catnip 1.2 0.0
Oenothera biennis common evening primrose 0.0 0.1
Onoclea sensibilis sensitive fern 19.9 0.0
Oryzopsis aspen'folie roughleaf ricegrass 0.8 1.9
Osmarhize berteroi sweet cicely 0.0 1.2
Osmunda cinnamomea cinnamon fern 5.1 0.0
Osmunda regalis royal fern 1.6 0.0
Panicum capillare witchgrass 0.4 0.1
Panicum spp panicum spp 0.8 0.2
Pamassia palustris grass of pamassus 1.2 0.0
Perthenacissus quinquefolia Virginia creeper 9.0 0.1
Pediculan’s canadensis Canadian lousewort 1.2 0.2

 

71

lIIIIIIIIIIII-Ilnrl-ilnirrrrr-IFFFFqu(UCHSSSSST/TTTTIIITT.UVVVVVVT..\

Table 24 (cont’d).

 

 

Species Common Name R U
Phalaris arundinacea reed canarygrass 2.7 0.0
Phleum pratense timothy 0.8 1.8
Pilea pumila Canadian clearweed 1.6 0.0
Piptatherum pungens mountain ricegrass 0.4 0.8
Piptatherum racemosum blackseed ricegrass 0.4 5.3
Poe palustris fowl bluegrass 0.8 0.6
Poa pratensis Kentucky bluegrass 0.4 1.6
Polygala paucifolia gaywings 0.8 0.1
Polygonatum spp Solomon's seal spp 1.2 1.5
Prenanthes alba white rattlesnakeroot 2.7 0.8
Prune/Ia vulgaris common selfheal 3.1 0.0
Pteridium aquilinum bracken fern 21.5 21.7
Pyrola americana American Wintergreen 8.2 2.9
Ranunculus hispidus hispid buttercup 5.5 0.1
Ranunculus pensylvanicus Pennsylvania buttercup 0.8 0.0
Ranunculus recurvatus blisterwort 0.0 0.1
Ribes Iacustre bristly black current 0.0 0.1
Rubus spp blackberry/raspbeny spp 37.1 19.0
Rudbeckia Iaciniata cutleaf coneflower 0.8 0.0
Rumex acetosella sheep sorrel 0.0 0.1
Rumex obtusifalius broad dock 0.4 0.0
Sagittaria latifolia broad leaved arrowhead 0.4 0.0
Schaenoplectus americanus chainnakers bulrush 0.4 0.0
Scirpus cyperinus woolgrass 3.1 0.1
Saute/[aria gelericulate marsh skullcap 7.4 0.0
Scutellaria Iateriflara blue skullcap 2.3 0.0
Solanum dulcamara bittersweet nightshade 6.6 0.0
Solidago spp goldenrod spp 36.3 3.8
Sphagnum spp sphagnum moss spp 36.7 25.5
Taraxacum otficinale common dandelion 2.3 1.9
Thalictrum dioicum early meadow rue 3.1 0.2
Thalictrum pubescens king of the meadow 10.2 0.0
Thalictrum thalictroides rue anemone 0.4 0.0
Toxicadendron redicens poison ivy 3.9 0.7
Trientalis barealis starflower 7.8 2.2
Trifalium spp clover spp 0.0 0.6
Trillium cemuum whip-poor-will flower 0.0 0.4
Trillium undulatum painted trillium 3.5 2.9
Typha spp cattail spp 0.8 0.0
Unknown spp 9.4 2.1
Vaccinium engustifolium bluebeny 0.0 0.1
Verbascum thepsus common mullein 0.0 0.1
Verbena hastata blue vervain 0.4 0.0
Veronica officinelis common gypsyweed 0.0 0.1
Veronica spp speedwell spp 0.0 0.1
Viola spp violet spp 31.3 7.0
Total number of species 163 128

 

72

Table
with
LOWI

Log
ABB
ACF
ACF
ACS

AC!

Tran-rrj-rmn-nv‘u‘D’U‘U‘UU

Table 25. Small woody (diameter <10 cm) species constancy of occurrence
within riparian (R) and upland (U) ecological zones of SM-ELU sites, in northern
Lower Michigan, 2000 and 2001.

 

 

Code Species Common Name R U
ABBA Abies balsamea balsam fir 18.5 5.3
ACPE Acer pensylvanicum striped maple 0.0 0.5
ACRU Aoer rubrum red maple 48.1 60.2
ACSAZ Acer saccharinum silver maple 1.9 0.0
ACSA3 Acer saccharum sugar maple 57.4 90.8
ACSPZ Acer spicetum mountain maple 5.6 10.7
ALINR Alnus rugosa speckled alder 46.3 5.3
AMELA Amelanchier spp junebeny spp ' 55.6 59.7
BEALZ Betula alleghaniensis yellow birch 3.7 0.0
BEPA Betula papyrifera paper birch 1.9 0.5
CACA18 Carpinus caroliniana ironwood 24.1 60.2
CEOCZ Cephalanthus occidentalis common buttonbnrsh 1.9 0.0
COAL2 Camus altemifolia altemateleaf dogwood 9.3 13.1
COFO Camus faemina stiff dogwood 5.6 0.0
COSE16 Camus sericea red osier dogwood 22.2 45.6
CORNU Camus spp dogwood spp 11.1 6.8
COCO6 Corylus comuta beaked hazelnut 18.5 7.8
CRATA Crataegus spp hawthorn spp 3.7 1.0
FAGR Fagus grandifolia American beech 11.1 43.7
FRAM2 Fraxinus americana white ash 38.9 51.5
FRNI Fraxinus nigra black ash 9.3 1.5
F RPE Fraxinus pennsylvanice green ash 22.2 10.2
HAVI4 Hamamelis virginiana American witchhazel 5.6 16.5
LALA Larix laricina tamarack 3.7 0.0
LOOB Lanicera ablangifalia swamp fly honeysuckle 0.0 1.5
LOSE Lanicera sempervirens trumpet honeysuckle 1.9 0.0
LONIC Lanicera spp honeysuckle spp 25.9 14.1
None None 0.0 1.0
PHOP Physocarpus apulifalius ninebark 5.6 0.5
PIGL Picea glauca white spruce 3.7 0.5
PIMA Picea mariana black spruce 0.0 0.5
PlST Pinus strobus white pine 5.6 1.5
POBA2 Papulus balsamifera balsam poplar 3.7 2.4
POGR4 Papulus grendidentate bigtooth aspen 7.4 6.8
POTRS Papulus tremuloides quaking aspen 22.2 26.7
PRNI Prunus nigra Canadian plum 1.9 0.0
PRSEZ Prunus serotina black cheny 61.1 71.4
PRUNU Prunus spp cheny spp 1.9 1.9
PRVI Prunus virginiana choke cheny 27.8 35.0
QURU Quercus rubra red oak 3.7 5.3
RHAL Rhamnus alnifalia alderleaf buckthom 13.0 0.0
RIAMZ Ribes americanum American black current 5.6 1.0
RICY Ribes cynasbati prickly goosebeny 9.3 6.3
RIGL Ribes glandulasum skunk current 3.7 0.0
RIHI Ribes hirtellum smooth goosebeny 0.0 3.4

73

Table 25 (cont’d).

 

 

Code Species Common Name R U

RIHU Ribes hudsanianum northern black current 1.9 0.0
RILA Ribes Iacustre bristly black current 5.6 6.3
RITR Ribes tn’ste red current 1.9 0.0
SALIX Salix spp willow spp 7.4 0.5
SANIC4 Sambucus niga common elderberry 1.9 0.0
THOCZ Thuja occidentalis arborvitae 1.9 0.0
TIAM Tilia americana basswood 9.3 24.8
TSCA Tsuga canadensis hemlock 5.6 1.0
ULAM Ulmus americana American elm 24.1 17.0
UNK Unkown spp 3.7 1.9
VIAC Vibumum acerifolium mapleleaf vibumum 11 .1 14.6
VI LE Viburnum Ientago nannybeny 1.9 0.0
VIOP Viburnum apulus cranbeny vibumum 7.4 12.1
VIBUR Vibumum spp vibumum spp 1.9 0.5
VIPA7 Vitis palmata catbird grape 1.9 0.0
Total number of species 55 45

 

Table 26. Large woody (DBH >10 cm) species constancy of occurrence within
riparian land upland (U) ecological zones of SM-ELU sites, in northern Lower
Michigan, 2000 and 2001.

 

 

Code Species Common Name R U

ABBA Abies balsamea balsam fir 11.1 1.0
ACRU Acer rubrum red maple 25.9 27.2
ACSA3 Acer saccharum sugar maple 44.4 61.2
AMELA Amelanchier spp junebeny spp 0.0 1.0
BEALZ Betula alleghaniensis yellow birch 14.8 0.0
BEPA Betula papyrifera paper birch 7.4 1.9
CACA18 Carpinus caroliniana ironwood 22.2 31 .1
FAGR Fagus grandifolia American beech 0.0 6.8
FRAM2 Fraxinus americana white ash 7.4 4.9
FRNI Fraxinus nigra black ash 3.7 0.0
FRPE Fraxinus pennsylvanice green ash 22.2 0.0
None None none 0.0 1.9
PIGL Picea glauca white spruce 7.4 0.0
PIMA Picea mariana black spruce 3.7 0.0
PIST Pinus strabus white pine 0.0 1.0
POGR4 Papulus grendidentate bigtooth aspen 3.7 7.8
POTR5 Papulus tremuloides quaking aspen 14.8 22.3
PRSEZ Prunus serotina black cheny 7.4 4.9
THOC2 Thuja occidentalis arborvitae 7.4 1.0
TIAM Tilia americana basswood 14.8 21 .4
TSCA Tsuga canadensis hemlock 7.4 6.8
ULAM Ulmus americana American elm 3.7 0.0
VIBUR Vibumum spp vibumum spp 3.7 0.0
Total number of species 19 16

 

74

The average number of herbaceous species per plot and the average
percent cover for vegetation cover variables (measured at every vegetation plot)
are compared in Table 27. Within all the SM—ELU sites, a total of 64 plots were
delineated within the R zone and 213 within the U zone. Number of herbaceous
species, percent herbaceous cover, graminoid cover, and forb cover were all
significantly greater in the R zone. Average percent overstory cover and
bareground were significantly less within the R zone.

Table 27. Comparison of the number of herbaceous species per vegetation plot

and average percent cover variable means between riparian l and upland (U)
ecological zones of SM-ELU sites, in northern Lower Michigan, 2000 and 2001.

 

 

 

R (n=64) U (n=213)
Variable Mean Std.Dev. Mean Std.Dev.
# Herbaceous Species* 32.92 19.54 11.37 8.79
% Herbaceous Cover“ 54.16 31.89 13.21 18.78
% Understory Cover 19.23 17.74 20.94 14.79
% Overstory Cover‘ 63.30 29.18 84.56 21.42
% Graminoid Cover" 25.27 23.43 4.79 7.38
% Forb Cover“ 44.38 19.01 16.07 17.36
% Bareiround" 33.50 21.76 64.88 18.97
Table A-El. Denotes significant difference between riparian l and upland (U) zones

(T -test, p <0.10).

Small woody, tree, and coarse woody debrislstumplsnag variables
(measured at every other vegetation plot) are compared between R and U zones
in Table 28. For SM-ELU sites, 27 of these plots were delineated within the R
zone and 103 within the U zone. The average number of small woody stems
less than 1 m in height was significantly less in the R zone. This is the opposite
of both JP-ELU and RM-ELU sites which both had higher values for number of
small woody stems and species diversity in the R zone. Average total BA of tree

species was significantly lower in the R zone than the U zone. The average

75

number of coarse woody debris objects and the number of snags were
significantly more within the R zone. Average total volume of coarse woody
debris, snags, and stumps were significantly greater in the R zone.

Table 28. Comparison of small woody (diameter <10 cm), tree (DBH >10 cm),

and coarse woody debrislsnaglstump variables between riparian l and upland (U)
ecological zones of SM-ELU sites, in northem Lower Michigan, 2000 and 2001.

 

 

 

R (n=27) U (n=103)
Variable Mean Std.Dev. Mean Std.Dev.
# Small Woody Stems >1m height 22.93 22.76 22.84 26.01
# Small Woody Stems <1m height* 123.41 97.56 227.63 154.64
Small Woody Species Diversity 10.15 4.75 9.15 3.36
# Trees 5.89 3.64 6.57 3.60
Total Tree Basal Area* 0.19 0.12 0.25 0.16
Tree Sp Diversity 2.33 1.21 2.00 0.98
# Coarse Woody Debris Objects” 4.30 3.34 3.03 2.75
# Snags“ 1.41 1.95 0.62 1.02
# Stumps 1.15 1.46 0.76 1.36
Total Debris Volume* 1 15.80 136.52 52.84 87.22
Total Snag Volume* 66.30 143.65 24.81 53.06
Total Stump Volume* 8.75 23.01 2.38 5.19
Table A-lj. Denotes significant difference between riparian l and upland (U) zones

(T -test, p <0.10).

Vertebrate Community

The composition of the herpetofauna and small mammal communities
within the R and U zones are discussed below. The avian community is not
discussed in terms of distinct communities within the R and U zones. Avian
sample points were on a scale too coarse (every 150 m) to meaningfully
associate to the R and U zones as detections at one survey point could include
individuals occurring in the R and the U zones. The avian community also
functions at a larger scale, in that individual bird movements most likely
consistently encompasses both R and U zones. The avian community is not

included in this section.

76

J_P-_EAJ

The total number of individuals per plot for herpetofauna species present
in the R and U zones of JP-ELU are shown in Table 29. Five species were
observed in the R zone, all at higher densities than in the U zone. The bull frog
(Rana catesbeiana), green frog (Rana clamitans melanota), and northern leopard
frog were observed in the R zone only. Four species occurred in the U zone,
with the blue-spotted salamander (Ambystame laterale) and redback salamander
being found in the U zone only. The R zone had a higher density of total
herpetofauna individuals observed than the U zone.
Table 29. Total number of herpetofauna species individuals (number per plot in

parentheses), and total number of species observed within riparian l and upland
(U) zones of JP-ELU sites, in northern Lower Michigan, 2000 and 2001.

 

 

R U
Species ‘ Common Name (n=34) (n=217)
Ambystama laterale blue-spotted salamander 0 (0.000) 2 (0.009)
Bufa americanus americanus eastern American toad 1 (0.029) 2 (0.009)
Opheodrys vemalis smooth green snake 1 (0.029) 3 (0.014)
Plethadon cinemas redback salamander 0 (0.000) 3 (0.014)
Rana catesbeiana bull frog 2 (0.059) 0 (0.000)
Rana clamitans melanota green frog 9 (0.265) 0 (0.000)
Rana pipiens northern leopard frog 3 (0.088) 0 (0.000)
Total number of herpetofauna individuals 16 (0.471) 10 (0.046)
Total number of herpetofauna species 5 4

 

The total number of small mammal individuals per species per trap night in
the R and U zones are shown in Table 30. Eight species occurred in the R zone
and 10 species in the U zone. The masked shrew (Sarex cinereus) and
woodland jumping mouse (Napaeazapus insignis) were observed in the R zone

only. The least shrew, southern bog lemming, southern flying squirrel, and

77

thirteen-lined ground squirrel were observed in the U zone only. The R zone had

a slightly higher total number of small mammals captured per trap night.

Table 30. Total number of small mammal species individuals (number per trap
night in parentheses), and total number of species observed within riparian I and
upland (U) zones of JP-ELU sites, in northern Lower Michigan, 2000 and 2001.

 

 

R U
Species Common Name (n=34) (n=217)
Blarina brevicauda shorttail shrew 1 (0.006) 2 (0.002)
Citellus tridecemlineatus thirteen-lined ground squirrel 0 (0.000) 5 (0.005)
Clethrianamys gapperi boreal redback vole 2 (0.013) 37 (0.034)
Cryptotis parva least shrew 0 (0.000) 1 (0.001)
Glaucomys sabrinus northern flying squirrel 1 (0.006) 2 (0.002)
Glaucomys valans southern flying squirrel 0 (0.000) 1 (0.001)
Napaeazapus insignis woodland jumping mouse 3 (0.019) 0 (0.000)
Peromyscus maniculatus deer mouse 7 (0.045) 62 (0.056)
Sarex cinereus masked shrew 1 (0.006) 0 (0.000)
Synapyomys coaperi southern bog lemming 0 (0.000) 1 (0.001)
Tamias striatus eastern chipmunk 9 (0.058) 26 (0.024)
Tamiasciurus hudsanicus red squirrel 1 (0.006) 2 (0.002)
Total number of small mammal individuals 25 (0.161) 139 (0.126)
Total number of small mammal species 8 10

 

RM-ELU

The total number of individuals per plot for herpetofauna species present
in the R and U zones of the RM-ELU are shown in Table 31. All seven
herpetofauna species were observed in both the R and U zones, all of which
were found at higher densities in the R zone, with the exception of the redback

salamander. The R zone had a higher density of total herpetofauna individuals

observed than the U zone.

78

Table 31. Total number of herpetofauna species individuals (number per plot in
parentheses), and total number of species observed within riparian l and upland
(U) zones of RM-ELU sites, in northern Lower Michigan, 2000 and 2001.

 

 

R U
Species Common Name (n=54) Q1=183)
Bufa americanus americanus eastern American toad 5 (0.093) 9 (0.049)
Heterodan platirhinos eastern hognose snake 1 (0.019) 1 (0.005)
Plethadon cinereus redback salamander 8 (0.148) 42 (0.230)
Pseudacris crucifer crucifer northem spring peeper 4 (0.074) 6 (0.033)
Rana clamitans melanota green frog 6 (0.111) 1 (0.005)
Rana sylvatica wood frog 7 (0.130) 4 (0.022)
Thamnaphis sirtalis sirtalis eastern garter snake 3 (0.056) 2 (0.011)
Total number of herpetofauna individuals 34 (0.630) 65 (0.355)
Total number of herpetofauna species 7 7

 

The total number of small mammal individuals per species per plot in the

R and U zones of RM-ELU are shown in Table 32. Eight species occurred in the

R zone and 7 species in the U zone. An unknown shrew species and southern

bog lemming were captured in the R zone only, and the starnose male was

observed in the U zone only. The R zone had a lower number of total small

mammals captured per trap night.

Table 32. Total number of small mammal species individuals (number per trap
night in parentheses), and total number of species observed within riparian l and
upland (U) zones of RM-ELU sites, in northern Lower Michigan, 2000 and 2001.

 

 

R U
Species Common Name (n=54) (n=183)
Blarina brevicauda shorttail shrew 2 (0.005) 10 (0.010)
Condylure cristata starnose male 0 (0.000) 1 (0.001)
Napaeazapus insignis woodland jumping mouse 5 (0.014) 2 (0.002)
Peromyscus maniculatus deer mouse 37 (0.100) 169 (0.172)
Shrew spp Unknown shrew spp 1 (0.003) 0 (0.000)
Synapyomys cooperi southern bog lemming 1 (0.003) 0 (0.000)
Tamias striatus eastern chipmunk 11 (0.030) 33 (0.034)
Tamiasciurus hudsanicus red squirrel 3 (0.008) 1 (0.001)
Zapus hudsanius meadowjumping mouse 1 (0.003) 1 (0.001)
Total number of small mammal individuals 61 (0.165) 217 (0.220)
Total number of species a 7

 

79

SM-ELU

The total number of individuals per plot for herpetofauna species present
in the R and U zones are shown in Table 33. Nine species were observed in the
R zone, all at higher densities than in the U zone. The bull frog (Rana
catesbeiana), pickerel frog (Rana palustris), and an unknown turtle species were
observed in the R zone only. Six species occurred in the U zone. The R zone
had a higher density of total herpetofauna individuals observed than the U zone.
Table 33. Total number of herpetofauna species individuals (number per plot in

parentheses), and total number of species observed within riparian l and upland
(U) zones of SM-ELU sites, in northern Lower Michigan, 2000 and 2001.

 

 

R U
Species Common Name (n=64) (n=21 3)
Bufa americanus americanus eastern American toad 45 (0.703) 9 (0.042)
Plethadon cinereus redback salamander 25 (0.391) 69 (0.324)
Pseudacris crucifer crucifer northern spring peeper 5 (0.078) 2 (0.009)
Rana catesbeiana bull frog 1 (0.016) 0 (0.000)
Rana clamitans melanota green frog 11 (0.172) 2 (0.009)
Rana palustris pickerel frog 1 (0.016) 0 (0.000)
Rana sylvatica wood frog 4 (0.063) 1 (0.005)
Thamnophis sirtalis sirtalis eastern garter snake 2 (0.031) 3 (0.014)
Turtle spp unknown turtle spp 1 (0.016) 0 (0.000)
Total number of herpetofauna individuals 95 (1.484) 86 (0.404)
Total number of herpetofauna species 9 6

 

The total number of individuals of small mammal species per plot in the R
and U zones are shown in Table 34. Eight species occurred in the R zone and 7
species in the U zone. The R zone had a slightly higher total number of small

mammals captured per trap night.

80

Table 34. Total number of small mammal species individuals (number per trap
night in parentheses), and total number of species observed within riparian l and
upland (U) zones of SM-ELU sites, in northern Lower Michigan, 2000 and 2001.

 

 

R U
Species Common Name (n=64) (n=213)
Blarina brevicauda shorttail shrew 8 (0.025) 7 (0.008)
Clethrianamys gapperi boreal red back vole 3 (0.010) 1 (0.001)
Napaeazapus insignis woodland jumping mouse 18 (0.057) 10 (0.01 1)
Peromyscus maniculatus deer mouse 30 (0.095) 112 (0.123)
Shrew spp unknown shrew spp 1 (0.003) 0 (0.000)
Sarex cinereus masked shrew 1 (0.003) 1 (0.001)
Tamias striatus eastern chipmunk 5 (0.016) 34 (0.037)
Zapus hudsanius meadow jumping mouse 1 (0.003) 4 (0.004)
Total number of small mammal individuals 67 (0.213) 169 (0.186)
Total number of species 8 7

 

Model Development

Canonical analysis was run to compare the ability of different descriptive
vegetation variables to describe the vegetative community. The purpose was to
chose descriptive vegetation variables to include in further analysis that provide
more practical data collection methods than direct species identification, but are
ecologically meaningful in describing the vegetation community. Those
descriptive variables that correlate the most with the species occurrence
variables were chosen to included in discriminant analysis for model
development. This step was taken to ensure that the variables chosen for
inclusion in the model were demonstrably descriptive of the vegetative
community, and to eliminate variables that, if included in discriminant analysis,
may show up as significantly related to the RIU delineations but are actually
perceiving something other than the vegetation community.

The dependent variables in canonical analyses were meters from stream,

total number of herbaceous species, and percent cover of herbaceous species

81

(both forbs and graminoid), understory cover, overstory cover, graminoid cover,
forb cover, and bareground. The independent variables were individual species
presence/absence data, and species assemblage variables composed by adding
presence/absence data for species of similar occurrence patterns to form one
variable. The species assemblage variables included the following; all species
that were detected only once (Spp 1 Doc), incidental species (occurred in <5% of
plots within an ELU) whose occurrences were mostly within 100 m of the river
(Incd <100m), incidental species whose occurrence patterns were non-predictive
(Incd NonPred), and non-incidental but non-predictive species occurrences
(Nonlncd NonPred). Variable selection through canonical analysis was
determined for each ELU separately.

The descriptive vegetation variables selected from canonical analysis
were included in discriminant function analysis to identify which of those
variables best discriminated between the RIU zones. Variables whose means
were significantly different between the two groups discriminate between them.
These variables were then used in a model to predict group membership of new
cases in the model validation data set. This model will enable the classification of
new plot data into either the R or U zone with accurate probability.

Stepwise discriminant analysis starts with the most significant variable and
develops a discriminant model, then adds the next most significant variable at
step two and develops a discriminant model with both variables. Stepwise
discriminant analysis continues adding one variable at a time at each step, until

all variables are included at the last step.

82

JP-ELU

Canonical analysis was run to assess the relationship between descriptive
vegetation variables and species occurrence data. Table 35 shows the Chi-
square test for significance of the eight canonical roots. The first 6 roots are
significant with p-levels <01 and are interpreted further.

Table 35. Chi-square test for significance of canonical roots for JP-ELU data,
from sites in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001.

 

 

Root Removed Chi-square Degrees freedom p-Ievel
0 9131 .67 272 0.0000
1 737.31 231 0.0000
2 488.76 1 92 0.0000
3 324.80 155 0.0000
4 214.58 120 0.0000
5 115.93 87 0.0210
6 61 .25 56 0.2934
7 28.38 27 0.3917

 

The canonical factor loadings (correlation between the canonical root and
the variables) for each significant root are given for the dependent variables in
Table 36. The variable that is most strongly correlated with each of the first 6
significant roots is highlighted; meters from stream, # herbaceous species, %
understory cover, % graminoid cover, % forb cover, and % bareground. The
factor loading for the variable "# herbaceous species” in root 1 is exceptionally
high with a value of 1.0. This is due to the fact that number of herbaceous
species in the summation of the independent variables of species occurrence
data. This variable was included in the descriptive variables set because it is a

measure of species diversity that can be derived by counting the different kinds

83

of plant species in a vegetation plot without requiring the identification of Genus

species.

Table 36. Canonical factor loadings for the dependent variables of each

canonical root of the JP-ELU data from sites in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-

2001. The variable that is most strongly correlated with each of the first 6

significant roots is highlighted.

 

 

Variable Root 1 Root 2 Root 3 Root 4 Root 5 Root 6
Meters From Stream -0.2050 0.5283 -0.3441 0.1192 0.5042 0.1696
# Herbaceous Species 1.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
% Herbaceous Cover 0.4547 -0.1739 0.4434 -0.1 158 -0.3587 0.2665
% Understory Cover 0.6161 -0.6488 0.0727 -0.2259 0.3510 0.1005
% Overstory Cover -0.0996 -0.1274 0.4587 0.2104 -0.2309 0.1907
% Graminoid Cover 0.4421 -0.1643 -0.4344 -0.5376 -0.4918 0.0593
% Forb Cover 0.0906 0.4199 0.7228 -0.4855 0.0803 -0.1077
% Bareground -0.6234 0.2258 -0.1405 0.4779 0.0816 0.4189

 

The descriptive vegetation variables chosen for inclusion in discriminant
analysis were meters from stream, # herbaceous species, % understory cover, %
graminoid cover, % forb cover, and % bareground. These variables drive the
correlations between the two data sets extracted in the 6 significant roots, and
therefore these variables best describe the variability of the species occurrence
data.

Table 37 shows several statistical results of stepwise discriminant analysis
for the JP-ELU data set. A commonly reported test of significance of the
discriminatory power of the model is the F-test. The p-levels for the respective F -
values for the first 5 steps are <0.1, therefore these 5 variables significantly
discriminate between the RIU zones (Table 37). The 6th variable, %Overstory,

was not added to the stepwise model because its F-to-enter value was below the

specified F-to-enter minimum value of 1.0. The p values in Table 37 do not

84

reflect the true alpha error rate (the probability of erroneously rejecting the null
hypothesis that there is no discrimination between the groups) because stepwise
discriminant analysis capitalizes on chance when it ‘pick and chooses’ the next
variable to include in the model based on the significant contribution of each
variable. Therefore, model choice should not be based exclusively on these p
values and I also considered \Mlks’ Lambda values.

Table 37. Tests of significance of the discriminatory power for the classification
model for the JP-ELU data from sites in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001.

 

 

Number of

Variables Wilks’ F-value
Variable Step in Model Lambda F-value (df1, df2) p-level
% Understory 1 1 0.6344 71.4601 (1, 124) 0.0000
# Spp 2 2 0.5432 51.7167 (2, 123) 0.0000
Meters 3 3 0.4766 44.6585 (3, 122) 0.0000
% Graminoid 4 4 0.4611 35.3507 (4, 121) 0.0000
% Forbs 5 5 0.4496 29.3807 (5, 120) 0.0000

 

Vlfilks’ Lambda is the standard statistic that is used to indicate the
statistical significance of the discriminatory power of the current model. A erks’
Lambda of 0 represents perfect discrimination while a value 1 signifies no
discriminatory power. The relative change in the Wilks’ Lambda was considered
to evaluating which model retained the most discriminatory power while
remaining simplistic with less variables. Wilks’ Lambda decreased substantially
through step 3, but decreased less with the addition of variables 4 and 5 (Table
37). Therefore, the model which included the variables %Understory, # Species,

and Meters was chosen.

85

Once the appropriate model is determined, we can review the discriminant
function coefficients. These coefficients are those in the linear equation model.
The model equation for JP-ELU is;

A = c + b1*x1 + b2*x2 + b3*x3
where c is a constant, b1 through b3 are the discriminant function coefficients for
the respective model variables x1 through x3. The value “A” determines group
membership, depending on the least absolute difference from either mean of
canonical variables of groups U or R (Table 38). In this case, the median
between the two group means is 1.1109, therefore any value of “A” >1.1109 is
within the R zone, and any value <1.1109 is within the U zone. Table 38 displays
the raw coefficients that are used with the raw data, and the standardized
coefficients which are used with the standardized data.

Table 38. Discriminant function coefficients for the classification model

developed at step 3 of discriminant analysis for the JP-ELU data from sites in
northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001.

 

 

 

Raw Coefficients Standardized Coefficients

% Understory Cover 0.6948 0.5452

# Herbaceous Species 0.7590 0.5647

Meters From Stream -0.5336 -0.4873

Constant -0.0273 001273

Means of Canonical Variables

(for bath Raw Coefficients and

Standardized Coefficients) U = -0.4106 R = 2.6324

 

The classification matrix (Table 39) tells how well the classification model
predicts group membership and shows the number of cases that were correctly
classified and those that were misclassified. The a priori probabilities were user

specified in analysis and represent the proportional group sizes of the data set.

86

The classification of the model development data set are the same data set that
were used to develop the discriminant functions, and therefore we should not
base our confidence of predicting group membership of new cases based on
what we already know has happened. To truly determine the predictive power of
the model it is necessary to test its accuracy using new data. I used the JP-ELU
model validation data set to classify new cases to allow us to assess the
predictive power of the model. This resulted in 121 correct classifications of 125
cases, or 97% accuracy (Table 39).

Table 39. Classification matrix (predicted classifications in columns) for the

classification model developed at step 3 of discriminant analysis for the JP-ELU
data from sites in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001.

 

 

 

 

 

Percent
Group Correct U R
JP-ELU Model Development
U 96.33 105 4
R 58.82 7 10
Total 91.27 112 14
A priori probabilities p=.86508 p=.13492
JP-ELU Model Validation
U 98.15 106 2
R 94.12 1 16
Total 97.60 107 18

 

RM-ELU
Eight canonical roots were derived from canonical analysis of the RM-ELU
data. Table 40 shows the Chi-square test for significance of roots. The first 6

roots are significant with p-levels <01, and are interpreted further.

87

Table 40. Chi-square test for significance of canonical roots with successive
roots removed for RM-ELU data, from sites in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-

 

 

2001 .
Root Removed Chi-square Degrees Freedom p-Ievel
0 1981.18 312 0.0000
1 635.69 266 0.0000
2 425.65 222 0.0000
3 293.04 180 0.0000
4 201.44 140 0.0005
5 121 .43 102 0.0924
6 66.1 0 66 0.4735
7 26.23 32 0.7534

 

The canonical factor loadings for each significant root are given for the
dependent variables in Table 41, where the variable that is most strongly
correlated with each of the first 6 significant roots is highlighted; # herbaceous
species, % graminoid cover, meters from stream, % herbaceous cover, %
overstory cover, and % understory cover. The factor loading for the variable “#
herbaceous species” for the first root is exceptionally high with a value of 0.9999,

this again is due to number of species being the summation of the independent

variables.

Table 41. Canonical factor loadings for each significant canonical root for the

dependent variables of the RM-ELU data from sites in northern Lower Michigan,
2000-2001. The variable that is most strongly correlated with each of the first 6
significant roots is highlighted.

 

 

Variable Root 1 Root 2 Root 3 Root 4 Root 5 Root 6
Meters From Stream -0.3539 -0.3506 0.7466 0.0678 0.2234 -0.3087
# Herbaceous Species 0.9999 -0.0070 -0.0051 0.0039 -0.0074 -0.0014
% Herbaceous Cover 0.4567 -0.0666 0.0621 -0.7676 -0.3318 -0.2078
% Understory Cover 0.2250 0.2736 -0.4277 0.0553 0.1831 -0.6832
% Overstory Cover -0.0990 0.4715 0.1132 0.6719 -0.5162 -0.1657
% Graminoid Cover 0.5702 -0.6813 -0.3012 -0.0576 -0.3065 -0.0344
% Forb Cover 0.2571 0.0948 0.2097 -0.4112 -0.1365 -0.3570
% Barefliund -0.4818 0.1844 0.0330 0.4907 0.3995 0.1760

 

88

The descriptive vegetation variables for the RM-ELU chosen for inclusion
in discriminant analysis are # herbaceous species, % graminoid cover, meters
from stream, % herbaceous cover, % overstory cover, and % understory cover.
These variables drive the correlations between the two data sets extracted in the
6 significant roots, and therefore these variables best describe the variability of
the species occurrence data.

Table 42 shows several statistical results of stepwise discriminant analysis
for the RM-ELU data set. The p-levels for the respective F-values of the first 4
steps are <0.1, therefore these 4 variables significantly discriminate between the
RIU zones. The two remaining variables, %Herb and %Overstory, were not
added to the stepwise model because their respective F-to-enter values were
below the specified F-to-enter minimum value of 1.0. The relative change in
\Mlks’ Lambda was also considered to determine which model retained the most
discriminatory power while remaining simplistic with less variables. \erks’
Lambda decreased substantially through step 2, but decreased less with the
addition of variables 3 and 4 (Table 42). Therefore, the model which included the
variables # Species, Meters, and %Graminoid was chosen.

Table 42. Tests of significance of the discriminatory power for the classification
model for the RM-ELU data from sites in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001.

 

 

Number of
Variables erks' F-value
Variable Step in Model Lambda F-value (df1, df2) p-level
# Herbaceous Species 1 1 0.6486 63.3797 (1 , 117) 0.0000
Meters From Stream 2 2 0.4970 58.7094 (2, 116) 0.0000
% Graminoid Cover 3 3 0.4720 42.8752 (3, 115) 0.0000
% Understory Cover 4 4 0.4548 34.1594 (4, 114) 0.0000

 

89

Once the appropriate model is determined, we can review the discriminant
function coefficients. The RM-ELU discriminant function coefficients in Table 43
are the coefficients in the linear equation model;

A = c + b1*x1 + b2*x2 + b3*x3
where c is a constant, b1 through b3 are the discriminant function coefficients for
the respective model variables x1 through x3. The value “A” determines group
membership, depending on the least absolute difference from either mean of
canonical variables of groups U or R (Table 43). In this case, the median
between the two group means is 0.6544, therefore any value of “A" >0.6544 is
within the R zone, and any value <0.6544 is within the U zone. Table 43 displays
the raw coefficients that are used with the raw data, and the standardized
coefficients that are used with the standardized data.

Table 43. Discriminant function coefficients for the classification model

developed at step 3 of discriminant analysis for the RM-ELU data from sites in
northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001.

 

 

 

Raw Coefficients Standardized Coefficients

# Herbaceous Species 1.1889 0.9045

Meters From Stream -0.8257 -0.6856

% Graminoid Cover -0.3672 -0.3794

Constant -0.0129 -0.0129

Means of Canonical Variables

(for both Raw Coefficients and

Standardized Coefficients) U = -0.5817 R = 1.8905

 

The classification matrix (Table 44) shows the number of cases that were
correctly classified and those that were misclassified. The a priori probabilities
were user specified in analysis and represent the proportional group sizes of the

data set. To determine the predictive power of the model, new cases were

90

classified using the RM-ELU model validation data set. This resulted in 105
correct classifications out of 118 cases, or 89% accuracy (Table 44).
Table 44. Classification Matrix (predicted classifications in columns) for the

classification model developed at step 3 of discriminant analysis for the RM-ELU
data from sites in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001.

 

 

 

 

 

Percent
Group Correct U R
RM-ELU Model Development
U 95.60 87 4
R 78.57 6 22
Total 91.60 93 26
A priori probabilities p=.76471 p=.23529
RM-ELU Model Validation
U 93.48 86 6
R 73.08 7 19
Total 88.98 93 25

 

SM-ELU

Canonical analysis was run to assess the relationship between descriptive
vegetation variables and species occurrence data. Table 45 shows the Chi-
square test for significance of roots, where the first 6 roots are significant with p-
levels <01, and are interpreted further.
Table 45. Chi-square test for significance of canonical roots with successive

roots removed for SM-ELU data, from sites in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-
2001.

 

 

Root Removed Chi-square Degrees freedom p-level
0 2400.90 296 0.0000
1 932.86 252 0.0000
2 581.92 210 0.0000
3 341 .35 170 0.0000
4 220.66 1 32 0.0000
5 136.87 96 0.0040
6 73.95 62 0.1425
7 31 .37 30 0.3975

 

91

The canonical factor loadings for each significant root are given for the
dependent variables in Table 46, where the variable that is most strongly
correlated with each of the first 6 significant roots is highlighted; # herbaceous
species, % graminoid cover, % forb cover, % overstory cover, % understory
cover, and meters from stream. The factor loading for the variable “#
herbaceous species” for the first root is again exceptionally high at 0.9998, which
is due to the number of species being the summation of the independent
variables.

Table 46. Canonical factor loadings for each significant canonical root for the
dependent variables of the SM-ELU data from sites in northern Lower Michigan,

2000-2001. The variable that is most strongly correlated with each of the first 6
significant roots is highlighted.

 

 

Variable Root 1 Root 2 Root 3 Root 4 Root 5 Root 6
Meters From Stream -0.5962 -0.1822 -0.4004 0.3330 0.0866 0.3774
# Herbaceous Species 0.9998 -0.0118 -0.0047 0.0039 -0.0089 -0.0033
% Herbaceous Cover 0.7943 0.4341 0.2488 0.0514 0.0194 0.2512
% Understory Cover 0.1129 -0.2112 0.0314 -0.3450 0.8776 -0.0847
% Overstory Cover -0.5015 -0.4803 -0.0882 -0.5841 -0.2633 0.1572
% Graminoid Cover 0.7215 0.6094 -0.3146 -0.0712 0.0489 -0.0078
% Forb Cover 0.7322 0.3286 0.5147 0.0719 -0.1146 -0.0033
% BareLround -0.7442 -0.3983 -0.2908 -0.0322 -0.0821 0.2255

 

The descriptive vegetation variables for the RM-ELU chosen for inclusion
in discriminant analysis are # herbaceous species, % graminoid cover, % forb
cover, % overstory cover, % understory cover, and meters from stream. These
variables drive the correlations between the two data sets extracted in the 6
significant roots, and therefore these variables best describe the variability of the

species occurrence data.

92

Table 47 shows several statistical results of stepwise discriminant analysis
for the SM-ELU data set. The p-levels for the respective F-values for each step
in Table 47 are <01 and therefore all 6 variables significantly discriminate
between the RIU zones. Wilks’ Lambda values were also considered to
determine which model retained the most discriminatory power while remaining
simple with less variables. Wilks’ Lambda decreased most at step two, and
decreased relatively little with the addition of variables 3 through 6 (Table 47).
Therefore, the model which included the variables Meters and %Graminoid was
chosen.

Table 47. Tests of significance of the discriminatory power for the classification
model for the SM-ELU data from sites in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001.

 

 

Number of
Variables Wilks' F-value
Variable Step in Model Lambda F-value (dft, df2) p-Ievel
Meters From Stream 1 1 0.5927 92.7753 (1, 135) 0.0000
% Graminoid Cover 2 2 0.5264 60.2846 (2, 134) 0.0000
% Forb Cover 3 3 0.5198 40.9499 (3, 133) 0.0000
% Overstory Cover 4 4 0.5131 31.3131 (4, 132) 0.0000
% Bareground 5 5 0.5114 25.0343 (5, 131) 0.0000
# Herbaceous Species 6 6 0.5106 20.7676 (6, 130) 0.0000

 

Once the appropriate model is determined, we can review the discriminant
function coefficients. The SM-ELU discriminant function coefficients in Table 48
are the coefficients in the linear equation model;

A = c + b1*x1+ b2*x2
where c is a constant, b1 and b2 are the discriminant function coefficients for the
The value “A” determines group

respective model variables x1 and x2.

membership, depending on the least absolute difference from either mean of

93

canonical variables of groups U or R (Table 48). In this case, the median
between the two group means is 1.1109, therefore any value of “A” >-0.6160 is
within the U zone, and any value <-0.6160 is within the R zone. Table 48
displays the raw coefficients that are used with the raw data, and the
standardized coefficients which are used with the standardized data.

Table 48. Discriminant function coefficients for the classification model

developed at step 3 of discriminant analysis for the SM-ELU data from sites in
northern Lower Michigan, 2000—2001.

 

 

 

Raw Coefficients Standardized Coefficients
Meters From Stream 1.0767 0.8147
% Graminoid cover -0.5881 -0.4896
Constant -0.0711 430711
Means of Canonical Variables
(for both Raw Coefficients and
Standardized Coefficients) U = 0.5092 R = -1.7412

 

The classification matrix (Table 49) tells how well the classification model
predicts group membership and shows the number of cases that were correctly
classified and those that were misclassified. The a priori probabilities were user
specified in analysis and represent the proportional group sizes of the data set.
In order to test the predictive power of the model I classified new cases from the
SM-ELU model validation data Set. This resulted in 123 correct classifications

out of 140 cases, or 88% accuracy (Table 49).

94

Table 49. Classification Matrix (predicted classifications in columns) for the
classification model developed at step 3 of discriminant analysis for the SM-ELU
data from sites in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001.

 

 

 

 

 

Percent
Group Correct U R
SM-ELU Model Development
U 99.06 105 1
R 64.52 1 1 20
Total 91.24 116 21
A priori probabilities p=.77372 p=.22628
SM-ELU Model Validation
U 89.72 96 11
R 81.82 6 27
Total 87.86 102 38

 

95

DISCUSSION

Riparian areas are indisputably unique, valuable, and sensitive parts of
landscapes. Their protection and conservative management are imperative to
the ecological integrity of riverine and terrestrial ecosystems. The goal of this
study was to delineate the riparian/upland gradient in terms of riparian zones
where management activities should limit disturbance and upland areas relatively
more suitable for disturbance. The communities were classified by floristic
composition as an indicator of environmental factors that affect species
occurrence, and grouped communities and their environments into categories
useful for management interpretations. Identification of future site locations as
either riparian or upland places the site into a larger context of a group that
shares similar ecological traits. This classification system can provide resource
managers a tool to help evaluate management alternatives.

Riparian areas, like wetlands, occur due to hydrologic conditions (high
water table, periodic flooding) and soil conditions (elevated levels of soil nutrients
and soil moisture) dissimilar to those of nearby upland areas. Riparian areas,
however, usually lack the amount or duration of water present in wetlands, but
are wetter than uplands. Many studies have identified the composition of the
vegetative community in the riparian areas as distinctive from surrounding upland
areas (Lamb and Mallik 2003, Waters et al. 2001, Van Caller et al. 2000).
Geomorphic or hydrologic features that create riparian conditions were not
measured, however, there is reasonable certainty that hydrophytic herbaceous

vegetation exists in higher proportions than surrounding areas where these

conditions exist. The spatial extent of herbaceous species adapted to wet
conditions was the basis for my riparian/upland delineation. The percent of
hydrophytic vegetation present was used as an indicator of environmental factors
that affect species reproduction, growth, competition, and therefore community
development. The existence of hydrophytic vegetation was the best available
indicator within my data set that relates the presence of sensitive riparian areas
and therefore justifies conservative management practices. It is acknowledged
that this approach is a conservative measurement but should not yield a false
positive, that if hydrophytic vegetation is not present, then wetland/riparian
conditions are not present, and therefore disturbance is acceptable.

This classification system is based on identification of repeatable patterns
of the herbaceous vegetation within each ELU. All of the percent herbaceous
WIS variables were significantly different between the R and U zones of each
ELU, with the one exception of %FAC in SM—ELU. In both the JP-ELU and RM-
ELU, %FAC, %FACW, %OBL, and %NI were greater in the R zone. In SM-ELU,
%FACW and %OBL were greater in the R zone. As would be expected,
%FACW, %OBL, and %UPL showed the largest disparities between the R and U
zones in all ELUs.

This study shows that riparian areas support higher vegetation species
diversity, high biomass, and habitat for many unique species in comparison to
surrounding uplands. Herbaceous species diversity was much greater in the R
zones of all ELUs, and >45% of those species present were not found in the

adjacent uplands. Shrub species occurrence showed the same trends in all

97

ELUs, greater species diversity and a greater number of unique species in the R
zone, although the magnitude of the differences between the R and U zones
were less extreme. Tree species diversity and number of unique species were
generally comparable between the R and U zones in all ELUs, although they
were slightly greater in the R zone in the JP-ELU and SM-ELU, and slightly less
in the R zone in the RM-ELU.

The riparian areas of each ELU had greater vegetation structural diversity
and density than the adjacent upland areas. The R zones of JP-ELU and RM-
ELU had significantly greater herbaceous cover, understory cover, and graminoid
cover, and significantly less bareground, than the U zones. The SM-ELU R zone
had significantly greater herbaceous cover, graminoid cover, and forb cover, and
significantly less understory cover and bareground than the U zone.

The number of small woody stems (diameter <10 cm) was significantly
greater in the R zones of both JP-ELU and RM-ELU, although the number of
small woody stems <I m in height was significantly less in the R zone of SM-ELU.
Tree species diversity, number of trees, and total basal area were less likely to
show significant differences between the R and U zones for all 3 ELUs. Total
number of trees and total tree basal area were significantly less in the R zones of
JP-ELU and SM-ELU, respectively. The number of coarse woody debris objects,
snags, and stumps, and total volume of each were greater within the R zone for
all ELUs, with the exception of number and volume of snags in JP-ELU.

The R zones of all ELUs had greater herbaceous species diversity and

cover, higher understory species diversity and cover, and greater density and

98

total volume of coarse woody debris, snags, and stumps. Tree species diversity,
the number of trees, and total tree basal area were the only vegetative variables
that were primarily less in the R zones than the U zones. The greater vegetative
species diversity and structural complexity of the R zones would logically support
higher diversity and abundance of vertebrate species, presumably through
decreased competition for resources and increased niche partitioning. The data
support this premise as the majority of herpetofauna and small mammal species
observed were found at higher densities within the R zone.

The total density of herpetofauna individuals was greatest in each R zone.
Each R zone also had either a greater or an equal number of herpetofauna
species compared to the U zones, and each of these species occurred at greater
densities within the R zone, with the exception of the redback salamander in RM-
ELU. The JP-ELU and SM-ELU each had 3 herpetofauna species unique to the
R zone. The blue spotted salamander and the redback salamander were the
only two herpetofauna species whose numbers were greater in the U zones; both
species were unique to the U zone in JP-ELU and the redback salamander was
found art higher densities with in the U zone of RM-ELU.

The total density of small mammal individuals was greatest in the R zone
in JP-ELU and SM-ELU. The woodland jumping mouse and masked shrew were
both found at higher densities in the R zones of each ELU. The eastern
chipmunk and red squirrel were captured at higher densities in the R zone in both
JP-ELU and RM-ELU. The deer mouse is one species that was found in lower

densities in the R zone across all ELUs.

99

For the JP-ELU, the measurement of percent understory cover, number of
herbaceous species, and meters from stream are capable of discriminating
between the R and U zones with 98% accuracy. The JP-ELU classification
model is:

X (R if >1.1109; U if <1.1109) = (-0.0273) + (0.6948)*°/oUnderstory Cover +

(0.7590)*Number Herbaceous Species + (—0.5336)*Meters From Stream.

F or RM-ELU, the number of herbaceous species, meters from stream, and
percent graminoid cover are capable of discriminating between the R and U
zones with 89% accuracy. The RM-ELU classification model is:

X (R if >0.6544; U if < 0.6544) = (-0.0129) + (1.1889 Number Herbaceous

Species + (-0.8257)*Meters From Stream + (-0.3672) *%Graminoid Cover.

For SM-ELU, meters from stream, and percent graminoid cover are
capable of discriminating between the R and U zones with 88% accuracy. The
SM-ELU classification model is:

X (R if <-0.6160; U if >—0.6160) = (-0.0711) + (1 .0767)*Meters From Stream +

(-0.5881)*%Graminoid Cover.

The vegetation and vertebrate community composition data provide an
ecological description of the classified R and U zones, lending value to the
classification system to resource managers. The classification of future sites as

riparian or upland, based on the present classification scheme, will provide an

100

ecological framework for the development of prescriptions and interpretations of
management activities. The classification system can also provide a framework

for systematic gathering and interpretation of new data.

101

MANAGEMENT RECOMENDATIONS

The R zones delineated in the 3 ELUs in northern Lower Michigan had
greater vegetation species diversity and structure, and greater herpetofauna and
small mammal species diversity and density, than adjacent uplands. Riparian
areas support greater biological diversity than surrounding upland areas as they
encompass a wide range of environmental conditions and ecological processes
in close proximity. Due to the linear nature of riparian areas along streams they
are vulnerable to disturbance from resource management activities that require
access to the stream. Disturbance to riparian areas can impact riparian functions
such as terrestrial and aquatic species habitat, rare and endangered species
habitat, wildlife habitat corridors, biodiversity refugia, soil fertility, bank stability,
erosion control, flood control, water quality and pollution abatement. It is evident
that caution is needed when management activities occur within or near riparian
areas and disturbance needs to be minimized.

To provide resource managers with a tool to assist in identifying the
riparian/upland border, I developed a riparian/upland delineation model for 3
ELUs. The models allow managers to simply and quickly determine the variable
width of the ecological riparian zone within a site. This information can be used
in management decisions and in determining stream buffer widths for protecting
riparian functions in these 3 ELUs. Use of these models will allow managers to
make better informed decisions on areas best suited for a given disturbance or

management regime.

102

In application, resource managers will need to consider the similarity of
other sites to the sites used in development of these models. In addition, these
models should serve as reconnaissance guides, and before management
activities are conducted within an area, surveys for rare and endangered plants
and wildlife should be completed, along with any wetland delineations required to
comply with legal issues.

Validation of these models could be conducted in additional sites within
the same ELU. This method could also be duplicated in additional ELUs in
northern Michigan or other geographic locations. The 3 ELUs included in this
study span the soil moisture and nutrient gradient in northern lower Michigan.
Nonetheless, similar classification models in additional ELUs in northern
Michigan would augment the utility of the current models in resource
management decisions. The models developed pertain to the 3 ELUs described.
In the absence of disturbance, sites within these ELUs will advanced along their
respective sucessional seres within their corresponding habitat type, resulting in
a change in their ELU status. The use of the models in individual sites may only
be temporally appropriate, within the time span that the current successional
vegetation of the site coincides to that of the ELU. However, natural and
managed disturbances may retard the successional advancement of a site, or
displace it within an earlier successional stage. The extent of stands within a
given ELU across a lanscape is dynamic and the models were developed for

current commonly occurring ELUs within the corresponding habitat type.

103

APPENDICES

104

APPENDIX A

Vegetation Species List

105

Table A-1. A list of all herbaceous species which occurred within vegetation
sampling plots in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001. Species are identified to

genus or genus species, wetland indicator status (WIS), and life form. All
information, including species code and currently accepted scientific and

common names, taken from The PLANTS Database (USDA, NRCS 2004).

 

 

Life
Code Species Common Name WIS1 Form2
ACMI2 Achillee millefolium common yarrow FACU F PNI
ACPA Actaea pachypoda white banebeny NO FPN
ADAL Adiantum aleuticum maidenhair fern NO FPN
AGRIM Agrimonia rastellata agrimony FACU FPN
AGGI2 Agrostis gigantea redtop FACW GPI
AGHY Agrostis hyemalis winter bentgrass FAC- GPN
AGPE Agrostis perennans upland bentgrass FAC- GPN
ALLIU Allium spp onion spp Nl* Nl*
ALTR3 Allium tricaccum wild leek FACU+ FPN
AMBRZ Amphicarpaea bracteata American hogpeanut FAC FVAPN
ANGE Andropagan gerardii big bluestem FAC- GPN
ANCA8 Anemone canadensis Canadian anemone FACW FPN
ANQU Anemone quinquefolia nightcaps FAC FPN
ANVI3 Anemone virginiana tall thimbleweed NO FPN
ANNE Antennaria neglecta field pussytoes NO FPN
APF L Apocynum flaribundum dogbane NO FPN
AQCA Aquilegia canadensis red columbine FAC- FPN
ARNU2 Aralia nudicaulis wild sarsparilla FACU SSPN
ARUV Arctastaphylas uva-ursi kinnikinnick UPL SSPN
ARSE2 Arenaria serpyllifolia thymeleaf sandwort FAC FAI
ARTR Arisaema triphyllum Jack in the pulpit FACW- FPN
ASIN Asclepias incamata swamp milkweed OBL FPN
ASCLE Asclepias spp milkweed spp NI NI
ASSY Asclepias syriaca common milkweed NO FPN
ASPLE Asplenium spp spleenwort spp Nl NI
ASTER Aster spp aster spp NI NI
ATFI Athyrium filix-femine common ladyfem FAC FPN
AVFA Avena fatua wild oat NO GAl
BAVU Barbarea vulgaris garden yellowrocket FAC FBI
BIDEN Bidens spp beggarticks spp Nl Nl
BLCI Blephilia ciliata downy pagoda-plant NO FPN
BOVI Batrychium virginianum rattlesnake fem FACU FPN
BRER2 Brachyelytrum erectum bearded shorthusk NO GPN
BRCI2 Bramus ciliatus fringed brome FACW GPN
BROMU Bramus spp bromus spp NI NI
BRTE Bramus tectorum cheatgrass NO GAPI
2BRY Bryophyte spp moss spp Nl Nl
CACA4 Calamagrostis canadensis bluejoint OBL GPN
CASTI3 Calamagrostis stricta northern reedgrass FACW+ GPN
CAPA5 Caltha palustris yellow marsh marigold OBL FPN
CASCS Camassia soilloides Atlantic camas FAC+ F PN

 

106

Table A-1 (cont’d).

 

 

Life
Code Species Common Name WIS1 Form2
CAAP2 Campanula aparinaides pursh marsh bellflower OBL FPN
CAROZ Campanula rotundifolia bluebell bellflower FAC- FPN
CAAL11 Carex albursina white bear sedge NO GPN
CAAR3 Carex arctata drooping woodland sedge NO GPN
CAAU3 Carex aurea golden sedge FACW+ GPN
CABE2 Carex bebbii Bebb’s sedge OBL GPN
CACA16 Carex castanea chestnut sedge FACW+ GPN
CACO7 Carex communis fibrousroot sedge NO GPN
CACR6 Carex crinita fringed sedge FACW+ GPN
CACR7 Carex cristatella crested sedge FACW+ GPN
CADE9 Carex deweyana dewey sedge FACU- GPN
CADI6 Carex disperma softleaf sedge OBL GPN
CAEBZ Carex ebumea bristleleaf sedge FACU- GPN
CAFL4 Carex flava yellow sedge OBL GPN
CAFO4 Carex formosa handsome sedge FACW- GPN
CAGR2 Carex gracillima graceful sedge FACU GPN
CAGR3 Carex granularis limestone meadow sedge FACW+ GPN
CAHY4 Carex hystericina bottlebnrsh sedge OBL GPN
CAIN11 Carex interior inland sedge OBL GPN
CAIN12 Carex intumescens greater bladder sedge FACW+ GPN
CALA18 Carex Iaxiculmis spreading sedge NO GPN
CALA19 Carex Iaxiflora broad looseflower sedge UPL GPN
CALE10 Carex Ieptalea bristlystalked sedge OBL GPN
CALE11 Carex leptonervia nerveless woodland sedge FAC GPN
CALU4 Carex Iupulina hop sedge OBL GPN
CAMAI2 Carex magellanica boreal bog sedge OBL GPN
CAPE11 Carex peckii Peck’s sedge NO GPN
CAPE4 Carex pedunculata longstalk sedge NO GPN
CAPE42 Carex pellita woolly sedge OBL GPN
CAPE6 Carex pensylvanica Pennsylvania sedge NO GPN
CAPL4 Carex plantaginea plantainleaf sedge NO GPN
CAPR12 Carex prasina drooping sedge OBL GPN
CAPR9 Carex projecta necklace sedge FACW+ GPN
CARE4 Carex retrorsa knotsheath sedge OBL GPN
CAROZZ Carex rosea rosy sedge NO GPN
CARO6 Carex rostrata beaked sedge OBL GPN
CATOR Carex rugosperma parachute sedge NO GPN
CASC13 Carex scabrata eastern rough sedge OBL GPN
CASC11 Carex scaparia broom sedge FACW GPN
CAREX Carex spp carex spp NI NI
CASP7 Carex sprengelii Sprengel’s sedge FAC GPN
CAST5 Carex stipata owlfruit sedge OBL GPN
CAST8 Carex stricta upright sedge OBL GPN
CATE3 Carex tenera quill sedge FAC+ GPN
CATR10 Carex trisperma threeseeded sedge OBL GPN
CAVU2 Carex vulpinoidea fox sedge OBL GPN
CATH2 Caulophyllum thalictraides blue cohosh NO FPN

 

107

Table A-1 (cont’d).

 

 

Life
Code Species Common Name WIS1 Form2
CEPU3 Centeurium pulchellum branched centaury FACU- FAI
CEFOV2 Cerastium fantanum big chickweed FACU FBPI
CHGL2 Chelone glabra turtle head OBL FPN
CIBU Cicuta bulbifera bulb bearing water hemlock OBL FPN
CIMAZ Cicuta maculata spotted water hemlock OBL FBPN
CIRA Cimicifuga racemosa black cohosh NO FPN
CILA2 Cinna latifolia drooping woodreed FACW+ GPN
CIAL Circaea alpine small enchanters nightshade FACW FPN
CIRSI Cirsium spp thistle spp Nl Nl
CLMI60 Cladina mitis blue cladonia NO LN
CLRA60 Cladina rangiferina greygreen reindeer lichen NO LN
CLCRZ Cladonia cristatella cup lichen NO LN
CLOCO Clematis occidentalis western blue virginsbower NO SSVPN
CLVU Clinapadium vulgare wild basil NO FPN
CLUM2 Clintonia umbellulata white clintonia NO FPN
COVI6 Coeloglossum viride longbract frog orchid PAC FPN
COPE80 Comptonia peregrine sweet fern NO SSPN
COAR4 Convolvulus arvensis field bindweed NO FVPI
COTR2 Coptis trifolia goldthread FACW FPN
COCA13 Camus canadensis bunchbeny dogwood FAC FPN
CRCA3 Crepis capillaris smooth hawksbeard NO FABI
CRCA9 Cryptotaenia canadensis Canadian honewort FAC FPN
CYAR5 Cypripedium arietinum ram's head lady's slipper FACW+ FPN
CYPRI Cypripedium spp lady's slipper spp NI NI
DAGL Dactylis glamerata orchardg rass FACU GPl
DARE Dalibarda repens robin mnaway FACU- FPN
DASP2 Danthania spicata poverty oatgrass NO GPN
DEVE Decodon verticillatus swamp loosestrife OBL SSPN
DEFL Deschampsia flexuase wavy hairgrass NO GPN
DIDE4 Dichanthelium depauperatum starved panicgrass NO GPN
DILA8 Dichanthelium Iatifalium broadleaf rosette grass FACU GPN
DlLl2 Dichanthelium Iinearifolium slimleaf panicgrass NO GPN
DIXA Dichanthelium xanthophysum slender roseete grass NO GPN
DRRO Drosere rotundifolia round leaved sundew OBL FPN
DRBOZ Dryopteris baattii Boott's fem FACW FPN
DRCA11 Dryopteris carthusiana spinulose woodfem FACW- FPN
DRMA4 Dryopteris marginalis marginal woodfem FACU F PN
ELROZ Eleocharis mstellata beaked spikerush OBL GPN
ELHYH Elymus hystrix eastern bottlebrush grass NO GPN
ELRE4 Elymus repens quackgrass FACU GPl
ELTRT Elymus trechycaulus slender wheatgrass FAC GPN
ELVI3 Elymus virginicus Virginia wildrye FACW- GPN
EPRE2 Epigaea repens trailing arbutus NO SSPN
EPCIC Epilobium ciliatum fringed willowherb FACU FPN
EPLE2 Epilobium Ieptophyllum bog willowherb OBL FPN
EPHE Epipactis helleborine broadleaf helleborine NO FPN
EQFL Equisetum fluviatile water horsetail OBL FPN

 

108

Table A-1 (cont’d).

 

 

Life
Code Species Common Name WIS1 Form2
EQHY Equisetum hyemale scouringrush horsetail FACW- FPN
ERPU Erigeron pulchellus robin plantain FACU FPN
ERVI9 Eriapharum viridicarinatum thinleaf cottonsedge OBL GPN
EUFI Eupatorium fistulosum trumpetweed OBL F PN
EUPE3 Eupatorium perfolietum boneset FACW+ FPN
EUPUP Eupatorium purpureum sweetscented joepyeweed FAC FPN
EUCO10 Euphorbia coral/ate flowering spurge NO FPN
EUES Euphorbia esula leafy spurge NO FPI
FESU3 Festuca subverticillata nodding fescue FACU+ GPN
FRAGA Fragaria spp strawbeny spp NI NI
GAASZ Galium asprellum rough bedstraw OBL FPN
GAOD3 Galium odoratum sweet scented bedstraw NO FPI
GAHI2 Gaultheria hispidula creeping snowbeny FACW SSPN
GAPR2 Gaultheria procumbens eestem teabeny FACU SSPN
GABA Geylussacie baccata black hucklebeny FACU SPN
GETI Genista tinctoria dyers greenweed NO SPI
GEAL3 Geum aleppicum yellow evens FAC-r- FPN
GELA Geum Ieciniatum rough evens FACW FPN
GLCA Glyceria canadensis rattlesnake mannagrass OBL GPN
GLST Glyceria strieta fowl mannagrass OBL GPN
GYDR Gymnocarpium dryapteris western oa kfem FAC FPN
HADE2 Halenia deflexa American spurred gentian FAC FAN
HEBIZ Helianthemum bicknellii hoary frostweed NO SSPN
HEDI2 Helianthus divaricatus woodland sunflower NO FPN
HENOA Hepatica nobilis var. acute sharp lobed hepatica NO FPN
HENOO Hepatica nobilis var. obtuse round lobed hepatica NO FPN
HICA10 Hieracium caespitosum meadow hawkweed NO FPN
HICA3 Hieracium canadense Canada hawkweed NO FPN
HIERA Hieracium spp hawkweed spp NI Nl
HIVE Hieracium venosum rattlesnake weed NO F PN
HYAM Hydrocatyle americana American marshpennywort OBL FPN
HYPE Hypericum perforatum common St. Johnswort NO FPI
IMCA Impatiens capensis jewelweed FACW FAN
IRVE2 Iris versicolor blue flag OBL FPN
JUTE Juncus tenuis poverty rush FAC GPN
JUAM Justicia americana American water-willow OBL FPN
KOMA Kaeleria macrantha prairie junegrass NO GPN
LAHI Lactuca hirsuta hairy lettuce NO FBN
LASE Lactuca seniala prickly lettuce FAC FABI
LATA Lactuca tatarice blue lettuce FAC FPN
LACA3 Laportea canadensis Canadian woodnettle FACW FPN
LACO3 Lapsana communis common nipplewort NO FAI
LEOR Leersia oryzoides rice cutgrass OBL GPN
LILIU Lilium spp lily spp NI NI
LIBO3 Linnaea barealis twinflower FAC FSSVPN
LISTE Listera spp twayblade spp NI Nl
LOCA2 Lobelia cardinalis cardinal flower OBL FPN

 

109

Table A-1 (cont’d).

 

 

Life
Code Species Common Name WIS1 Fonn2
LYCOP2 Lycopodium spp clubmoss spp NI NI
LYAM Lycopus americanus American water horehound OBL FPN
LYUN Lycopus uniflorus bugleweed OBL FPN
LYCl Lysimachia ciliata fringed loosestrife FACW FPN
LYTEZ Lysimachia tenestris earth loosestrife OBL FPN
MACA4 Maianthemum canadense Canada mayflower FAC FPN
MAST Matteuccia struthiopteris ostrich fern FACW F PN
MEVI Medeala virginiana Indian cucumber NO FPN
MELI2 Melampyrum Iineare narrowleaf cowwheat FAC- FAN
MEVI2 Melanthium virginicum Vlrginia bunchflower FACW FPN
MESM Melica smithii Smith's melicgrass NO GPN
MEAR4 Mentha arvensis wild mint FACW FPN
MEPl Mentha piperita peppermint OBL FPI
MIEF Milium effusum American milletgrass NO GPN
MIRE Mitchella repens partridgebeny FACU+ SSPN
MlDl3 Mitella diphylla twoleaf miterwort FACU+ FPN
MINU3 Mitella nude naked miterwort FACW FPN
MOFI Monerda fistulosa wild bergamot FACU SSPN
MUGL3 Muhlenbergia glamerata spiked muhly FACW+ GPN
MUMEZ Muhlenbergia mexicana Mexican muhly FACW GPN
MYSC Myasatis scarpioides true forget me not OBL FPI
NECA2 Nepeta cataria catnip FAC- FPI
OEBI Oenothera biennis common evening primrose FACU FBN
ONSE Onoclea sensibilis sensitive fern FACW F PN
ORAS Oryzopsis asperifalia roughleaf ricegrass UPL GPN
OSBE Osmarhize berteroi sweet cicely NO FPN
OSCl Osmunda cinnamomea cinnamon fern FACW FPN
OSCLZ Osmunda claytoniana intemlpted fern FAC+ FPN
OSRE Osmunda regalis royal fern OBL FPN
PAOB6 Packera abovata round leaved ragwort FACU- F PN
PACA6 Panicum capillare witchg rass FAC GAN
PANIC Panicum spp panicum spp NI NI
PAPA8 Pamassia palustris grass of pamassus OBL FPN
PAQU2 Parthenacissus quinquefolia Virginia creeper FAC- VPN
PECA Pedicularis canadensis Canadian lousewort FACU+ SSPN
PHAR3 Phalaris arundinacea reed canarygrass FACW+ GPN
PHPR3 Phleum pratense timothy FACU GPI
PIPU2 Pilea pumila Canadian clearweed FACW FAN
PIPU7 Piptatherum pungens mountain ricegrass NO GPN
PIRAS Piptatherum racemosum blackseed ricegrass NO GPN
PLHY2 Pletanthere hyperbarea northern green orchid FACW+ FPN
POPA2 Poa palustris fowl bluegrass FACW+ GPN
POPR Paa pratensis Kentucky bluegrass FAC— GPNI
POPA5 Polygala paucifolia gaywi ngs FACU FPN
POPO Polygala palygama racemed milkwort FACU- FBN
POLYGZ Polygonatum spp Solomon's seal spp NI NI
POSC3 Polygonum scandens climbirLchalse buckweat FAC FVPN

 

110

Table A-1 (cont’d).

 

 

Life
Code Species Common Name WIS1 Form2
POSl2 Potentilla simplex common cinquefoil FACU- FPN
PRAL2 Prenanthes alba white rattlesnakeroot FACU FBPN
PRVU Prunella vulgaris common selfheal FAC FPN
PRPU3 Prunus pumila sand cheny NO SPN
PTAQ Pteridium aquilinum bracken fem FACU FPN
PYAM Pyrola americana American Wintergreen FAC- SSPN
RAAB Ranunculus abortivus littleleaf buttercup FACW- FBPN
RAHI Ranunculus hispidus bristly buttercup FAC FPN
RAPE2 Ranunculus pensylvanicus Pennsylvania buttercup OBL FAPN
RAREZ Ranunculus recurvatus blisterwort FACW FPN
RILA Ribes Iacustre bristly black currant FACW SPN
RUCH Rubus chamaemorus cloudbeny NO SSPN
RUBUS Rubus spp blackbeny/raspbeny spp NI NI
RULA3 Rudbeckia Iaciniata cutleaf coneflower FACW+ SSPN
RUAC3 Rumex acetosella sheep sorrel FAC FPI
RUCR Rumex crispus curied dock FAC+ FPN
RUOB Rumex obtusifalius broad dock FACW FPI
RUVE3 Rumex verticillatus swamp dock OBL FPN
SALAZ Sagittaria latifolia broad leaved arrowhead OBL FPN
SAOD Sanicula odorata black snakeroot FAC+ FPN
SCPU Schizachne purpurascens false melic FACU+ GPN
SCSC Schizachyrium scoparium little bluestem FACU- GPN
SCAM6 Schaenoplectus americanus chairmaker‘s bulrush OBL GPN
SCCY Scirpus cyperinus woolgrass OBL GPN
SCEL Scutellaria elliptica hairy skullcap NO FPN
SCGA Scutellaria galericulate marsh skullcap OBL FPN
SCIN Scutellaria incana hoary skullcap NO FPN
SCLA2 Scutellaria Iateriflara blue skullcap OBL FPN
SITR3 Sibbaldiapsis tridentata shnlbby fivefingers NO SSPN
SMTA2 Smilax tamnoides bristly greenbrier FAC SSVPN
SODU Salanum dulcamara bittersweet nightshade FAC FSSPI
SOLID Solidago spp goldenrod spp NI NI
SONU2 Sarghastrum nutans indiangrass FACU+ GPN
SPHAGZ Sphagnum spp sphagnum moss spp NI NI
SPIN3 Sphenopholis intennedia slender wedgescale NO GPN
SPCR Sporobolus cryptandrus sand dropseed FACU- GPN
TAOF Taraxacum otficinale common dandelion FACU FPNI
THDI Thalictrum dioicum early meadow rue FACU+ FPN
THPU2 Thalictrum pubescens king of the meadow FAC FPN
THTH2 Thalictrum thalictroides rue anemone NO FPN
TORAZ Taxicodendran redicens poison ivy FAC+ SSVPN
TRVI2 Triadenum virginicum ngnia marsh St Johnswort OBL FPN
TRBOZ Trientalis barealis starflower FAC+ FPN
TRIFO Trifalium spp clover spp NI Nl
TRCE Trillium cemuum whip-poor-will flower FAC FPN
TRUN Trillium undulatum painted trillium FACU- FPN
TYPHA Typha spp cattail spp OBL FP

 

111

Table A-1 (cont’d).

 

 

Life
Code Species Common Name WIS1 Form2
UNK Unkown spp Unknown spp NI NI
URDI Urtica dioica stinging nettle FAC+ FPNI
VAAN Vaccinium angustifolium bluebeny FACU SSPN
VACO Vaccinium corymbosum highbush bluebeny FACW SPN
VETH Verbascum thapsus common mullein NO FBI
VEHA2 Verbena hastata blue vervain FACW+ FBPN
VEAN2 Veronica anagaIIis-aquatica water speedwell OBL FBPN
VEFI Veronica filiformis threadstalk speedwell NO FPI
VEOF2 Veronica oli‘icinalis common gypsyweed UPL FPN
VERON Veronica spp speedwell spp NI NI
VICIA Wcie spp vetch spp NI NI
VIOLA Viola spp violet spp NI NI

 

‘ Definition of WIS (Reed 1988).

N0 = No indicator category exists for given species, can assume it is an upland species.

OBL = Occur almost always (estimated probability >99%) under natural conditions in wetlands.
FACW = Usually occur in wetlands (estimated probability 67% - 99%) but occasionally found in
non-wetlands.

FAC = Equally likely to occur in wetlands or non-wetlands (estimated probability 34% - 66%).
FACU = Usually occur in non-wetlands (estimated probability 67% - 99%) but occasionally found
in wetlands (estimated probability 1% - 33%).

UPL = Occur almost always (estimated probability >99%) in non-wetlands.

NI = Insufficient information was available to determine an indicator status.

2 Definition of Life Form
L= Lichenous, G = Grass, F = Forb, SS = Subshmb, S = Shnrb, T = Tree, V = Vlne, A = Annual,
B = Biennial, P = Perennial, N = Native, l = Introduced.

* WIS and Life Farm at the Genus level is not available.

112

Table A-2. A list of all tree and shrub species which occurred within vegetation
sampling plots in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001. Species are identified to

genus or genus species, wetland indicator status (WIS), and life form. All
information, including species code and currently accepted scientific and
common names, taken from The PLANTS Database (USDA, NRCS 2004).

 

 

Life
Code Species Common Name WIS1 Form2
ABBA Abies balsamea balsam fir FACW TPN
ACPE Acer pensylvanicum striped maple FACU STPN
ACRU Acer rubrum red maple FAC TPN
ACSA2 Acer saccharinum silver maple FACW TPN
ACSA3 Acer saccharum sugar maple FACU STPN
ACSP2 Acer spicatum mountain maple FACU STPN
ALINR Alnus rugosa speckled alder OBL STPN
AMELA Amelanchier spp junebeny spp Nl' Nl*
BEALZ Betula alleghaniensis yellow birch FAC TPN
BEPA Betula papyrifera paper birch FACU+ TPN
BEPU4 Betula pumila swamp birch OBL SPN
CACA18 Carpinus caroliniana ironwood FAC STPN
CEOC2 Cephalanthus occidentalis common buttonbrush OBL STPN
COAL2 Camus altemifolia altemateleaf dogwood NO STPN
COCO6 Corylus comuta beaked hazelnut UPL STPN
COFO Camus faemina stiff dogwood FACW- STPN
CORNU Camus spp dogwood spp Nl Nl
COSE16 Camus serioea red osier dogwood NO STPN
CRATA Crataegus spp hawthom spp NI Nl
DAFL3 Dasiphara floribunda shrubby cinquefoil FACW SPN
FAGR Fagus grandifolia American beech FACU TPN
FRAM2 Fraxinus americana white ash FACU TPN
FRNI Fraxinus nigra black ash FACW+ TPN
FRPE Fraxinus pennsylvanice green ash FACW TPN
HAVI4 Hamamelis virginiana American witchhazel FACU STPN
KAPO Kalmia palifalia pale laurel OBL SPN
LALA Larix laricina tamarack FACW TPN
LOHI Lanicera hirsuta hairy honeysuckle FAC VPN
LONIC Lanicera spp honeysuckle spp Nl NI
LOOB Lanicera ablangifalia swamp fly honeysuckle OBL SPN
LOSE Lanicera sempervirens trumpet honeysuckle FAC- VPN
PHOP Physocarpus apulifalius ninebark FACW- SPN
PIBA2 Pinus banksiana jack pine FACU TPN
PIGL Picea glauca white spruce FACU TPN
PIMA Picea mariana black spruce FACW TPN
PIPU Picea pungens blue spruce NO TPN
PIRE Pinus resinose red pine FACU TPN
PIST Pinus strobus white pine FACU TPN
POBA2 Papulus balsamifera balsam poplar FACW TPN
POGR4 Papulus grendidentate bigtooth aspen FACU TPN
POTR5 Papulus tremuloides quaking aspen NO TPN

 

113

Table A-2 (cont’d).

 

 

Life
Code Species Common Name WIS1 Form2
PRNI Prunus nigra Canadian plum FACU- TPN
PRPE2 Prunus pensylvanica pin cherry FACU STPN
PRSEZ Prunus serotina black cheny FACU STPN
PRUNU Prunus spp cheny spp NI Nl
PRVI Prunus virginiana choke cheny FAC- STPN
PTTR Ptelea trifoliata common haptree FACU+ STPN
QUAL Quercus alba white oak FACU TPN
QURU Quercus rubra red oak FACU TPN
RHAL Rhamnus alnifalia alderleaf buckthom OBL SPN
RIAM2 Ribes americanum American black currant FACW SPN
RIBES Ribes spp currant spp Nl NI
RlCY Ribes cynasbati prickly goosebeny NO SPN
RIGL Ribes glandulasum skunk currant FACW SPN
RlHl Ribes hirtellum smooth goosebeny FACW SPN
RIHU Ribes hudsanianum northern black currant OBL SPN
RILA Ribes Iacustre bristly black currant FACW SPN
RITR Ribes triste red currant OBL SPN
ROSA5 Rosa spp wild rose spp NI NI
SALIX Salix spp willow spp Nl Nl
SANIC4 Sambucus nigra common elderberry FACW- STPN
SMTA2 Smilax tamnoides bristly greenbrier NO SSVPN
SPAL2 Spiraea alba white meedowsweet FACW+ SPN
THOC2 Thuja occidentalis arborvitae FACW TPN
TIAM 77Iia americana basswood FACU TPN
TSCA Tsuga canadensis hemlock FACU TPN
ULAM Ulmus americana American elm FACW- TPN
UNK Unknown spp NI NI
VIAC Vibumum acerifolium mapleleaf vibumum UPL SPN
VIBUR Vibumum spp vibumum spp NI Nl
VILE Vlbumum Ientago nan nybeny FAC+ STPN
VIOP Viburnum apulus cranbeny vibumum NO STPNI
VIPA7 Vitis palmata catbird grape OBL VPN
VIRA Viburnum rafinesquianum downy arrow wood NO SPN
VlRl Vitis riparia riverbank grape FACW- VPN

 

r Definition of WIS (Reed 1988).

N0 = No indicator category exists for given species, can assume it is an upland species.

OBL = Occur almost always (estimated probability >99%) under natural conditions in wetlands.
FACW = Usually occur in wetlands (estimated probability 67% - 99%) but occasionally found in
non-wetlands.

FAC = Equally likely to occur in wetlands or non-wetlands (estimated probability 34% - 66%).
FACU = Usually occur in non-wetlands (estimated probability 67% - 99%) but occasionally found
in wetlands (estimated probability 1% - 33%).

UPL = Occur almost always (estimated probability >99%) in non-wetlands.

Nl = Insufficient information was available to determine an indicator status.

2 Definition of Life Form

L= Lichenous, G = Grass, F = Forb, SS = Subshrub, S = Shrub, T = Tree, V = Vine, A = Annual,
B = Biennial, P = Perennial, N = Native, l = Introduced.

* WIS and Life Farm at the Genus level is not available.

114

APPENDIX B

Vegetation Species Composition and Structure by Site

115

Table B-1. Herbaceous species constancy of occurrence (percent of plots with
species present) in JP-ELU sites in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001.

 

 

Site Site Site Site Site
Species Common Name 1 2 3 4 5
Achillee millefolium common yarrow 0.5
Adiantum aleuticum maidenhair fern 0.6
Agrostis gigantea redtop 2.2
Agrostis hyemalis winter bentgrass 1.8
Anemone canadensis Canadian anemone 5.5 2.2
Anemone quinquefolia nig htcaps 2.0 2.3 0.6 1.3
Anemone virginiana tall thimbleweed 0.5
Antennaria neglecta field pussytoes 0.5 1.7
Apocynum Xfloribundum dogbane 2.7 1.7
Aquilegia canadensis red columbine 2.8
Arctastaphylas uva-ursi kinnikinnick 20.4 2.9 8.6 15.6 0.6
Arisaema triphyllum Jack in the pulpit 2.2
Aster spp aster spp 4.6 2.9 23.6 14.4
Athyrium filix-femina common ladyfem 4.1 0.6 1.9
Avena fatua wild oat 6.8 1.1
Blephilia ciliata downy pagoda-plant 1.5 0.9
Brachyelytrum erectum bearded shorthusk 7.3 4.4 3.8
Bramus ciliatus fringed brome 0.6
Bryophyte spp moss spp 1.3
Calemagrostis canadensis bluejoint 1.8 4.4
Caltha palustris yellow marsh marigold 0.5 1.1 0.6
Campanula aparinaides pursh marsh bellflower 1.9
Campanula rotundifolia bluebell bellflower 0.5 1.4
Carex aurea golden sedge 0.5
Carex bebbii Bebb's sedge 0.5
Carex castanea chestnut sedge 2.7 0.6
Carex ebumea bristleleaf sedge 0.6
Carex flava yellow sedge 7.3
Carex formosa handsome sedge 0.6
Carex gracillima graceful sedge 18.2 5.6 6.9
Carex granularis limestone meadow sedge 1.4 2.2
Carex hystericina bottlebrush sedge 0.6
Carex interior inland sedge 0.5
Carex intumescens greater bladder sedge 0.9 0.6
Carex Ieptalea bristlystalked sedge 4.5 1.1 1.3
Carex Iupulina hop sedge 2.3 2.2
Carex magellanica boreal bog sedge 0.5
Carex pensylvanica Pennsylvania sedge 45.0 80.9 72.3 81.7 91.3
Carex plantaginea plantainleaf sedge 0.6 0.6
Carex prasina drooping sedge 0.6
Carex rostrata beaked sedge 4.4
Carex scabrata eastern rough sedge 1.3
Carex scoparie broom sedge 0.6
Carex stipata owlfruit sedge 3.3

 

116

Table B-1 (cont’d).

 

 

Site Site Site Site Site
Species Common Name 1 2 3 4 5
Carex stricta upright sedge 3.2 2.2
Cimicifuga racemosa black cohosh 0.5 0.8
Cinna latifolia drooping woodreed 0.9 1.7 0.6
Cirsium spp thistle spp 0.9
Cladina mitis blue cladonia 64.6 15.7 48.6 32.8 65.0
Cladina rangiferina greygreen reindeer lichen 82.9 42.6 55.5 41.7 73.8
Cladonia cristatella cup lichen 13.3 25.6
Clematis occidentalis western blue virginsbower 1.0 5.5 7.8
Clintonia umbellulata white clintonia 0.6
Comptonia peregina sweet fern 1 6.9 8.6 32.8 2.5
Convolvulus arvensis field bindweed 0.6
Captis trifolia goldthread 0.5 0.6 1.9
Camus canadensis bunchbeny dogwood 0.5 1.1 0.6
Crepis capillaris smooth hawksbeard 1.4
Cypripedium spp lady’s slipper spp 1.4 1.3
Danthania spicata poverty oatgrass 5.8 3.4 38.6 27.8 15.6
Deschampsia flexuosa wavy hairgrass 10.8 11.8 0.9 41.7 1
Dichanthelium depauperatum starved panicgrass 5.0 1.7 3.8
Dichanthelium Iinearifolium slimleaf panicgrass 6.4 2.2 3.8
Dryopteris Xbaattii Boott’s fern 2.5
Dryopteris carthusiana spinulose woodfem 1.0
Elymus hystrix eastern bottlebrush grass 2.5
Elymus repens quackg rass 1 .4 0.6
Elymus trachycaulus slender wheatgrass 5.9
Elymus virginicus Virginia wildrye 3.6 6.7
Epigaea repens trailing arbutus 0.8 6.4 2.7 3.3 5.6
Equisetum fluvietile water horsetail 0.5
Erigeron pulchellus robin plantain 0.5 1.4 3.9
E upatarium purpureum sweetscented joepyeweed 0.5
Euphorbia esula leafy spurge 1.1
Festuca subverticillata nodding fescue 0.6
Fragaria spp strawbeny spp 9.5 3.3 2.5
Galium asprellum rough bedstraw 4.4 11.4 8.9 3.1
Galium odoratum sweet scented bedstraw 0.6 0.6
Gaultheria procumbens eastern teaberry 3.3 29.9 1.4 12.8 11.3
Geylussacie baccata black hucklebeny 43.3 12.7 2.3 1.1
Geum Ieciniatum rough evens 2.3 2.2
Glyceria strieta fowl mannagrass 2.3 7.8 0.6
Helianthemum bicknellii hoary frostweed 1.3
Hieracium caespitosum meadow hawkweed 1.4 3.9
Hieracium canadense Canada hawkweed 2.8
Hieracium spp hawkweed spp 0.5 3.6 6.7
Hieracium venosum rattlesnake weed 0.4 0.5 4.5 5.0 0.6
Hydrocatyle americana American marshpennywort 0.5 1.3
Hypericum perforatum common St. Johnswort 0.9
Impatiens capensis jewelweed 0.9 0.6
Iris versicalar blue flag 2.7

 

117

Table B-1 (cont’d).

 

 

Site Site Site Site Site
Species Common Name 1 2 3 4 5
Lactuca serriala prickly lettuce 5.5
Lycopodium spp clubmoss spp 0.9 1.1 1.9
Lycopus americanus American water horehound 5.0 1.1
Lycopus unifiarus bugleweed 1.5 4.1 3.8
Lysimachia ciliata fringed loosestrife 2.3 0.6
Maianthemum canadense Canada mayflower 1.7 9.3 15.0 11.7 4.4
Medeala virginiana Indian cucumber 0.5
Melampyrum Iineare narrowleaf cowwheat 12.5 10.8 2.7 2.2 3.8
Melica smithii Smith's melicgrass 0.6
Milium effusum American milletgrass 0.6
Mitchella repens partridgebeny 0.5 0.5 1.3
Mitella diphylla twoleaf mitenrvort 0.5 0.6
Mitella nude naked mitterwort 2.7
Muhlenbergia glamerata spiked muhly 2.3 1.1
Myasatis saarpiaides true forget me not 0.6
Nepeta cataria catnip 0.6
Onoclea sensibilis sensitive fern 2.3 2.8 1.3
Oryzopsis asperifalia roughleaf ricegrass 2.0 10.6 0.6
Osmunda cinnamomea cinnamon fern 1.5 0.9 0.6
Osmunda regalis royal fern 1.0
Packera obovata round leaved ragwort 2.7
Panicum spp panicum spp 4.9 0.5
Phalaris arundinacea reed canarygrass 1.7
Piptatherum pungens mountain ricegrass 79.6 19.1 26.4 27.2 9.4
Poe palustris fowl bluegrass 0.9 1.7
Polygala paucifolia gaywings 1.5 0.9
Polygala polygama racemed milkwort 1.8
Polygonatum spp Solomon's seal spp 2.7
Patentilla simplex common cinquefoil 1.4
Prenanthes alba white rattlesnakeroot 0.9
Prune/Ia vulgaris common selfheal 1.8
Prunus pumila sand cherry 27.7 13.3
Pteridium aquilinum bracken fem 38.3 66.2 6.4 4.4 35.6
Ranunculus abortivus littleleaf buttercup 0.6
Ranunculus hispidus bristly buttercup 0.5
Ranunculus pensylvanicus Pennsylvania buttercup 1.4 0.6
Rubus spp blackberry/raspbeny spp 1.5 2 8.3 1.9
Sanicula odorata black snakeroot 0.5
Schizachne purpurascens false melic 1
Schaenoplectus americanus chainnaker's bulrush 1.9
Scutellaria galericulate marsh skullcap 2.3 2.2
Scutellaria Ieteriflara blue skullcap 0.5 0.5 1.7
Sibbaldiapsis tridentata shrubby fivefi ngers 2.9
Smilax tamnoides bristly greenbrier 2.0
Solidago spp goldenrod spp 3.4 19.1 11.1
Sorghastrum nutans indiangrass 16.7
Sphagnum spp sphaflum moss spp 36.3 45.1 38.6 7 51.3

 

118

Table B-1 (cont’d).

 

 

Site Site Site Site Site
Species Common Name 1 2 3 4 5
Sphenopholis intennedia slender wedgescale 0.5
Taraxacum oflicinale common dandelion 0.5 1.4
Thalictrum dioicum early meadow rue 1.8
Thalictrum pubescens king of the meadow 0.5 18.2 13.3 0.6
Thalictrum thalictroides rue anemone 0.5
Toxicadendran redicens poison ivy 2.3
Triadenum virginicum Virginia marsh St Johnswort 0.6
Trientalis barealis starflower 3.9 2.3 3.9 1.9
Trillium cemuum whip-poor-will flower 0.5
Trillium undulatum painted trillium 0.5 0.9
Unknown spp unknown spp 0.5 10.9 0.6
Urtica dioica stinging nettle 0.6
Vaccinium angustifolium bluebeny 91.7 85.3 55.9 51.1 73.8
Vaccinium corymbosum highbush bluebeny 2.5
Vrcia spp vetch spp 0.5 2.5
Wale spp violet spp 0.4 6.9 19.5 8.9

 

119

Table B-2. Herbaceous species constancy of occurrence (percent of plots with
species present) in RM-ELU sites in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001.

 

 

Site Site Site Site Site
Species Common Name 1 2 3 4 5
Agimonia rastellata agrimony 7.8
Agrostis gigantea redtop 0.5 5.9
Agrostis hyemalis winter bentgrass 1.2 1.0
Allium spp onion spp 5.9
Amphicarpaea bracteata American hogpeanut 0.5
Andropagan gerardii big bluestem 1.0
Anemone canadensis Canadian anemone 1.7 1.1 1.6 2.9
Anemone quinquefolia nightcaps 1.2 3.3 31.3 7.4
Antennaria neglecta field pussytoes 0.6 0.5 2.0
Apocynum flaribundum dogbane 2.1 0.5
Aquilegia canadensis red columbine 0.5
Aralia nudicaulis wild sarsparilla 0.5 1.0 0.5
Arctastaphylas uva-ursi kinnikinnick 1.7 0.5 1.0 1.5 3.1
Arisaema triphyllum Jack in the pulpit 1.6 4.4 0.5
Asclepias incamata swamp milkweed 0.6 0.5
Asclepias spp milkweed spp 2.3 0.5 1.0
Asclepias syriaca common milkweed 0.5
Asplenium spp spleenwort spp 2.5
Aster spp aster spp 9.9 22.8 57.8 38.7 3.6
Athyrium filix-femina common ladyfem 6.4 10.9 6.3 3.4 2.0
Avena fatua wild oat 6.8
Bidens spp beggarticks spp 0.5
Blephilia ciliata downy pagoda-plant 10.9 1.6 0.5
Brachyelytrum erectum bearded shorthusk 6.0 62.0 16.2 3.1
Bramus ciliatus fringed brome 0.6 1.6 2.0
Bramus spp bromus spp 0.5
Bramus tectorum cheatgrass 0.5 1.0
Bryophyte spp moss spp 0.5 0.5
Calamagvostis canadensis bluejoint 3.5 1.6 2.6 6.9 0.5
Caltha palustris yellow marsh marigold 1.6 3.1 1.0 2.6
Campanula aparinaides pursh marsh bellflower 0.5 0.5
Campanula rotundifolia bluebell bellflower 2.6 0.5
Carex albursina white bear sedge 0.5 0.5
Carex arctata drooping woodland sedge 1.1
Carex bebbii Bebb's sedge 0.5 0.5 2.0
Carex crinita fringed sedge 2.0
Carex dispenna saflleef sedge 2.7 1.5 1.5
Carex fiava yellow sedge 1.2 9.8 0.5 5.9 0.5
Carex formosa handsome sedge 1.5
Carex gracillima graceful sedge 1.6 10.3 1.5
Carex hystericina bottlebrush sedge 2.1 0.5 0.5
Carex interior inland sedge 3.5 2.2 4.2 8.3 4.6
Carex intumescens greater bladder sedge 0.6 3.6 3.4
Carex Iaxiculmis spread—ing sedge 3.1 2.0

 

120

Table B-2 (cont’d).

 

 

Site Site Site Site Site
Species Common Name 1 2 3 4 5
Carex Iaxiflora broad looseflower sedge 3.3 24.0 7.4 0.5
Carex Ieptalea bristlystalked sedge 1.6 5.4 1.5
Carex Ieptanervia nerveless woodland sedge 2.1
Carex pedunculata longstalk sedge 1.0
Carex pellita woolly sedge 4.7 4.9 0.5
Carex pensylvanica Pennsylvania sedge 8.2 42.7 57.4 34.7
Carex plantaginea plantainleaf sedge 2.3 26.0 2.0
Carex retrorsa knotsheath sedge 0.5 0.5
Carex mstrata beaked sedge 1.0 1.5
Carex rugosperma parachute sedge 0.5 18.2 11.8 66.3
Carex scoparie broom sedge 6.0 1.5 2.0
Carex spp carex spp 1.2 0.5
Carex sprengelii Sprengel's sedge 1.5
Carex stipata owlfruit sedge 0.5 1.6 0.5
Carex stricta upright sedge 4.9
Carex trispenne threeseeded sedge 3.1 2.0
Caulophyllum thalictroides blue cohosh 0.5
Chelone glabra turtle head 0.5
Cicuta bulbifera bulb bearing water hemlock 0.5 0.5
Cicuta maculata spotted water hemlock 0.5
Cinna latifolia drooping woodreed 0.6 0.5 5.7 2.5
Circaea alpina small enchanters nightshade 1.2 2.2 2.6 1.0 2.0
Cirsium spp thistle spp 0.6 2.2 1.0 2.5
Cladina mitis blue cladonia 2.3 2.1 2.5 9.2
Cladina rangiferina greygreen reindeer lichen 0.6 6.9 14.3
Cladonia cristatella cup lichen 3.6 12.3 4.6
Clematis occidentalis western blue virginsbower 2.1 0.5
Clinapadium vulgare wild basil 1.7 3.3 7.3 2.0
Clintonia umbellulata white clintonia 1.7 3.3
Coeloglossum viride longbract frog orchid 2.2
Comptonia peregrine sweet fern 7.0 0.5 2.6 4.4 11.7
Convolvulus arvensis field bindweed 3.1 1.0
Captis trifolia goldthread 4.7 15.2 4.2 5.9 0.5
Camus canadensis bunchbeny dogwood 7.0 9.8 13.5 8.3
Crepis capillaris smooth hawksbeard 0.5
Cryptotaenia canadensis Canadian honewort 0.6 4.3 3.6 1.0 1.0
Cypripedium arietinum ram's head lady's slipper 0.5
Cypripedium spp lady's slipper spp 0.5 1.0
Dactylis glamerata orchardg rass 1.6
Dalibarda repens robin runaway 0.5
Danthania spicata poverty oatg rass 20.9 9.9 7.8 6.6
Deschampsia flexuosa wavy hairgrass 3.5 0.5 1.0 20.4
Dichanthelium depauperatum starved panicgrass 2.9 0.5 0.5 1.5
Dichanthelium Iatifalium broadleaf rosette grass 5.2 5.4
Dichanthelium Iinearifolium slimleaf panicgrass 0.6 1.6 1.5 0.5
Dichanthelium xanthophysum slender roseete grass 1.1
Dryopteris carthusiana spinulose woodfem 1.0 9.8

 

121

Table B-2 (cont’d).

 

 

Site Site Site Site Site
Species Common Name 1 2 3 4 5
Eleocharis rastellata beaked spikerush 1.0
Elymus repens quackg rass 2.3
Elymus trachyceulus slender wheatgrass 1 .0 0.5
Elymus virginicus Virginia wildrye 2.3 1.0 1.0
Epigaea repens trailing arbutus 3.5 1.1 2.5 5.1
Epilobium ciliatum fringed willowherb 1.6 0.5
Equisetum fluviatile water horsetail 4.7 4.9 8.9 15.7 3.6
Equisetum hyemale scouringrush horsetail 0.5
Eupatorium purpureum sweetscented joepyeweed 0.5 1.6 1.0
Fragaria spp strawbeny spp 8.7 3.3 20.3 11.8 0.5
Galium asprellum rough bedstraw 2.3 9.8 5.7 10.3 4.1
Galium odoratum sweet scented bedstraw 2.3 3.8 21.9 3.9 1.0
Gaultheria hispidula creeping snowbeny 4.3
Gaultheria procumbens eastern teabeny 30.8 7.1 5.2 18.6 44.9
Geylussacie baccata black hucklebeny 32.0 6.5 10.3 15.3
Genista tinctoria dyers greenweed 0.6 0.5
Geum Ieciniatum rough avens 1.2
Glyceria canadensis rattlesnake mannagrass 2.1 0.5
Glyceria striata fowl mannagrass 1.6 3.6 15.2 4.8
Gyrnnocarpium dryapteris western oakfem 1.1 3.1 4.4 1.0
Halenia deflexa American spurred gentian 0.5
Helianthus divaricatus woodland sunflower 0.5
Hepatica nobilis var. obtuse round lobed hepatica 7.8 1.0
Hieracium caespitosum meadow hawkweed 6.3
Hieracium spp hawkweed spp 6.4 9.2 17.2 3.4 2.0
Hieracium venosum rattlesnake weed 0.6 2.0
Hydrocatyle americana American marshpennywort 0.5
Hypericum perforatum common St. Johnswort 3.5 0.5
Impatiens capensis jewelweed 1.6 3.9 4.1
Iris versicalar blue flag 0.6
Juncus tenuis poverty rush 0.5 0.5
Kaeleria macrantha prairie junegrass 6.6
Lactuca serriala prickly lettuce 0.5
Lactuca tatarica blue lettuce 4.2 0.5
Lapsana communis common nipplewort 0.6
Leersia oryzoides rice cutgrass 2.1
Linnaea barealis twinflower 1 .2 15.1 6.4
Lycopodium spp clubmoss spp 4.1 1.1 6.8 2.5 0.5
Lycopus americanus American water horehound 1.0
Lycopus uniflarus bugleweed 2.9 4.9 4.2 7.4 1.5
Lysimachia ciliata fringed loosestrife 0.5 2.6 0.5
Lysimachia tenestris earth loosestrife 0.5 3.1
Maianthemum canadense Canada mayflower 18.0 34.2 49.5 52.5 19.4
Matteuccia struthiapteris ostrich fern 0.5
Melampyrum Iineare narrowleaf cowwheat 7.0 3.8 6.3 7.8 5.1
Melica smithii Smith’s melicgrass 2.9
Milium elfusum American milletgrass 0.5 0.5

 

122

Table B-2 (cont’d).

 

 

Site Site Site Site Site
Species Common Name 1 2 3 4 5
Mitchella repens partridgebeny 0.6 3.3 12.5 10.3
Mitella diphylla twoleaf miterwort 1.6 5.7 1.5
Mitella nude naked mitterwort 2.9 4.9 13.5 7.8 2.0
Nepeta cateria catnip 0.5
None no cover 0.5
Onoclea sensibilis sensitive fern 0.6 1.1 3.1 4.4
Oryzopsis asperifalia roughleaf ricegrass 8.1 29.9 63.0 38.2 6.1
Osmarhize berteroi sweet cicely 4.2
Osmunda cinnamomea cinnamon fern 2.9 8.7 1.0 0.5 0.5
Osmunda claytoniana inten'upted fern 0.5
Osmunda regalis royal fem 0.5 1.6 2.0
Panicum capillare witchg rass 0.6 1.0
Pamassia palustris grass of pamassus 2.6 1.0
Parthenocissus quinquefolia Vlrginia creeper 0.5 0.5
Pedicularis canadensis Canadian lousewort 6.8 1.0
Phalaris arundinacea reed cane rygrass 3.3 0.5
Phleum pretense timothy 0.5
Pilea pumila Canadian cleanrveed 1.6
Piptatherum pungens mountain ricegrass 0.6 8.3 2.5 1.5
Pletanthere hyperborea northern green orchid 0.5
Poe palustris fowl bluegrass 2.9 0.5 0.5
Polygala paucifolia gaywings 4.1 3.8 20.3 4.9
Polygala polygame racemed milkwort 0.5
Polygonatum spp Solomon's seal spp 1.1 2.6 4.4 0.5
Polygonum scandens climbing false buckweat 0.6
Prenanthes alba white rattlesnakeroot 1.2 0.5 2.1 2.5
Prunella vulgaris common selfheal 7.8 3.4 0.5
Prunus pumila send cheny 0.5 0.5
Pteridium aquilinum bracken fern 84.3 68.5 63.0 64.7 61.2
Pyrola americana American Wintergreen 0.5 11.5 6.4 1.0
Ranunculus hispidus bristly buttercup 3.1
Ranunculus recurvatus blisterwort 1 .1
Ribes Iacustre bristly black current 1.1
Rubus chamaemorus cloudbeny 0.5
Rubus spp blackbeny/raspbeny spp 8.1 19.0 67.2 20.1 0.5
Rumex acetosella sheep sorrel 8.1 7.3 0.5
Rumex crispus curled dock 0.5
Rumex verticillatus swamp dock 2.1
Sagittaria latifolia broad leaved arrowhead 0.5
Sanicula odorata black snakeroot 1.0
Schizachne purpurascens false melic 4.1
Schizachyrium scaparium little bluestem 2.5
Scirpus cyperinus woolgrass 1.1 0.5 1.5 0.5
Scutellaria elliptice hairy skullcap 1.0
Scutellaria galericulate marsh skullcap 3.3 2.1 1.5 1.0
Scutellaria incana hoary skullcap 1.0
Scutellaria Iateriflara blue skullcap 0.6 0.5 1.6 1.0 4.1

 

123

Table B-2 (cont’d).

 

 

Site Site Site Site Site
Species Common Name 1 2 3 4 5
Salenum dulcamara bittersweet nightshade 0.6 0.5 0.5
Solidago spp goldenrod spp 2.9 0.5 9.9 12.3
Sphagnum spp sphagnum moss spp 30.2 16.8 63.5 46.6 27.0
Sporobolus cryptandrus sand dropseed 0.5
Taraxacum oflicinale common dandelion 1.6 1.6 1.5
Thalictrum dioicum eariy meadow nle 0.6
Thalictrum pubescens king of the meadow 2.6 0.5 1.0
Taxicodendron redicens poison ivy 0.6 1.1 5.7 6.4
Trientalis barealis starflower 11.6 21.7 28.1 36.3 9.7
Trifalium spp clover spp 0.6
Trillium undulatum painted trillium 0.5 0.5
Typha spp cattail spp 0.5
Unknown spp unknown spp 2.3 6.0 7.3 4.4 2.0
Vaccinium angustifolium bluebeny 66.3 47.3 43.8 60.3 57.7
Verbascum thapsus common mullein 0.5
Veronica enagellis-equetice water speedwell 0.5
Vemnice filifannis threadstalk speedwell 0.5
Veronica ofiicinalis common gypsyweed 0.6 0.5 1.6
Viola spp violet spp 6.4 21.7 18.8 10.3

 

124

Table B-3. Herbaceous species constancy of occurrence (percent of plots with
species present) in SM-ELU sites in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001.

 

 

Site Site Site Site Site
Species Common Name 1 2 3 4 5
Achillee millefolium common yarrow 0.8
Actaea pachypoda white banebeny 0.6 0.4 0.4
Adiantum aleuticum maidenhair fem 2.7
Agrimonia rastellata agrimony 0.4 3.8 0.4
Agrostis gigantea redtop 1.5 2.4
Agrostis hyemalis winter bentgrass 0.9 0.6 1.5
Agrostis perennans upland bentgrass 0.6
Allium spp onion spp 2.3
Allium tricoccum wild leek 10.2
Amphicarpaea bracteata American hogpeanut 1.3
Anemone canadensis Canadian anemone 2.2 1.9 2.0 1.9 1.2
Anemone quinquefolia nightcaps 0.4 4.5 3.4 0.4
Anemone virginiana tell thimbleweed 1.9
Antennaria neglecta field pussytoes 0.6 0.5 0.4
Apocynum xtloribundum dogbane 3.2 9.8 0.8 0.4
Aralia nudicaulis wild sarsparilla 9.9 7.7 2.0 0.4 9.5
Arctastaphylas uva-ursi kinnikinnick 1.9 1.0
Arenaria serpyllifolia thymeleaf sandwort 0.6 0.5
Arisaema triphyllum Jack in the pulpit 3.2 2.3 1.2
Asclepias incamata swamp milkweed 0.4
Asclepias spp milkweed spp 1.3
Asplenium spp spleenwort spp 0.8
Aster spp aster spp 4.3 39.1 66.7 12.9 1.2
Athyrium filix-femine common ladyfem 0.9 9.6 0.5 0.8 2.8
Barbarea vulgaris garden yellowrocket 0.6
Blephilia ciliata downy pagoda-plant 3.8
Batrychium virginianum rattlesnake fern 4.5
Brachyelytrum erectum bearded shorthusk 1.0 0.8 6.0
Bramus ciliatus fringed brome 0.4
Bramus tectorum cheatg ress 0.4
Calemagrostis canadensis bluejoint 3.4 9.6 7.8 3.0 6.7
Calemagrostis stricta northern reedgrass 1.3
Caltha palustris yellow marsh marigold 1,3 1,1 4,0
Camassia scilloides Atlantic camas 0.4
Campanula aparinaides pursh marsh bellflower 2.2 0.4
Carex albursina white bear sedge 0.9 3.0 7.1
Carex bebbii Bebb’s sedge 3.0 11.5 4.4 0.8
Carex communis fibrousroot sedge 1.3
Carex crinita fringed sedge 7.3 0.8 1.6
Carex cristatella crested sedge 0.6
Carex deweyana dewey sedge 12.2 23.0
Carex dispenne softleaf sedge 0.4
Carex flave yellow sedge 2.3
Carex gracillime graceful sedge 3.0 1.9 5.6
Carex hystericina bottlebrush sedge 1.1
Carex interior inland sedge 0.6 6.4 0,4

125

Table B-3 (cont’d).

 

 

Site Site Site Site Site
Species Common Name 1 2 3 4 5
Carex intumescens greater bladder sedge 5.2 1.3 2.3 10.7
Carex Iexiflora broad looseflower sedge 0.4 0.8 2.4
Carex Ieptalea bristlystalked sedge 1.9 5.3 9.5
Carex peckii Peck’s sedge 0.4 5.7
Carex pedunculata longstalk sedge 1.3 6.9 1.1
Carex pensylvanica Pennsylvania sedge 0.4 5.8 1.2
Carex plantaginea plantainleaf sedge 1.7 9.0 3.9 4.9 5.2
Carex prasina drooping sedge 7.1 0.8
Carex projecta necklace sedge 6.9
Carex retrorsa knotsheath sedge 2.2
Carex rosea rosy sedge 0.9 11.0 4.8
Carex rugospenne parachute sedge 1.3 7.5
Carex scoparie broom sedge 0.6 0.4
Carex sprengelii Sprengel's sedge 0.4
Carex stipata owlfruit sedge 9.9 2.6 2.4
Carex stricta upright sedge 1.0 0.8
Carex tenera quill sedge 0.8
Carex vulpinoidea fox sedge 3.4 1.1
Caulophyllum thalictroides blue cohosh 0.8
Centeurium pulchellum branched centeury 0.6
Cerastium fontenum big chickweed 1.3
Chelone glabra turtle heed 0.6
Cicuta bulbifera bulb bearing water hemlock 0.9
Cicuta maculata spotted water hemlock 0.4
Cinna latifolia drooping woodreed 8.2 1.1 0.4
Circaea alpine small enchanters nightshade 8.3 2,9 0,4
Cirsium spp thistle spp 1.3 1.6
Cladina rangiferina greygreen reindeer lichen 0.6 0.8
Cladonia cristatella cup lichen 2.0
Clematis occidentalis western blue virginsbower 3.0 6.4 5.9 0.4 7.9
Clinapadium vulgare wild basil 5.1 0.4
Convolvulus arvensis field bindweed 3.9 0.4
Captis trifolia goldthread 1.3
Camus canadensis bunchbeny dogwood 0.4
Crepis capillaris smooth hawksbeard 0.9 0.6 3.4
Cryptotaenia canadensis Canadian honewort 5.1 0.8 0.4
Danthania spicata poverty oatg ress 0.4 3.8 4.4 12.7
Decodon verticillatus swamp loosestrife 0.4
Deschampsia flexuasa wavy hairgrass 0.4 6.4 0.4
Drosere rotundifolia round leaved sundew 0.4
Dryopteris baattii Boott's fern 0.6 0.5
Dryopteris carthusiana spinulose woodfem 37.1 12.2 1.0 6.1 6.0
Dryopteris marginalis marginal woodfem 1.9
Elymus trachycaulus slender wheatgrass 2.6 0.5
Elymus virginicus Vlrginie wildrye 6.5 3.8 1.0
Epigaea repens trailing arbutus 0.6
Epilobium ciliatum fringed willowherb 0,4 0,4
Epilobium Ieptophyllum bog willowherb 1.1
Epipactis helleborine broadleaf helleborine 16.7 11.3 4.2

 

126

Table B-3 (cont’d).

 

 

Site Site Site Site Site
Species Common Name 1 2 3 4 5
Equisetum fluvietile water horsetail 0.4 21.2 2.5 10.2 2.0
Equisetum hyemale scouringrush horsetail 9.0 1.5
Erigeron pulchellus robin plantain . 1.3 1.5
Eriapharum viridicerinetum thinleaf cottonsedge 1.1
Eupatorium fistulasum trumpetweed 4.5
Eupatorium perfolietum boneset 0.9 0.4
Eupatorium purpureum sweetscented joepyeweed 0.4 1.3 1.5 1.2
Euphorbia com/late flowering spurge 1.9
Festuca subverticillata nodding fescue 5.4
Fragaria spp strawbeny spp 0.4 26.3 11.3 7.6 3.6
Galium asprellum rough bedstraw 5.6 14.7 2.0 0.4 4.8
Galium odoratum sweet scented bedstraw 1.7 3.8 2.0 5.7 1.2
Gaultheria hispidule creeping snowberry 1.9
Gaultheria procumbens eestem teabeny 0.5 1.9
Geum aleppicum yellow evens 0.6 1.0
Geum Ieciniatum rough evens 0.4 1.9 3.0 0.4
Glyceria striata fowl mannagrass 9.5 6.4 8.8 4.2 6.3
Gymnacarpr'um dryapteris western oakfem 1.1 0.4
Hepatica nobilis var. acute sharp lobed hepatica 1.3 3.4
Hepatica nobilis var. obtuse round lobed hepatica 0.8
Hieracium caespitosum meadow hawkweed 0.4 0.4
Hieracium spp hawkweed spp 2.2 22.4 20.1 2.3 0.8
Hydrocatyle americana American marshpennywort 4.4
Hypericum perforatum common St. Johnswort 0.6
Impatiens oepensis jewelweed 7.8 0.6 1.1 3.2
Iris versicalar blue flag 0.4 0.4
Justicia americana American water-willow 0.4
Lactuca hirsute hairy lettuce 0.5
Laportea canadensis Canadian wood nettle 0.6
Leersia oryzoides rice cutg ress 3.9 1.1
Lilium spp lily spp 0.4
Linnaea barealis twinflower 0.4 1.5
Listera spp twayblade spp 1.5
Lobelia cardinalis cardinal flower 4.3
Lycopodium spp clubmoss spp 18.1 22.4 0.4 15.9
Lycopus americanus American water horehound 3,4 3.2 0.4
Lycopus uniflorus bugleweed 5.6 11.5 2.7 4.4
Lysimachia ciliata fringed loosestrife 0.6 0.4 0.8
Lysimachia tenestris earth loosestrife 0.6
Maianthemum canadense Canada mayflower 16.8 17.9 13.2 5.3 15.9
Matteuccia struthiapteris ostrich fern 1.7
Medeala virginiana Indian cucumber 9.5 1.3 0.5 12.3
Melanthium virginicum Vlrginie bu nchflower 0,4
Melica smithii Smith's melicgrass 1.0
Mentha arvensis wild mint 0.4
Mentha piperita peppermint 8.6 2.4
Milium effusum American milletgrass 2.2 8.7
Mitchella repens partridgebeny 0.6 2.5 0.8 0.8
Mitella diphylla twoleaf miterwort 1.0 3.0 0.4

 

127

Table B-3 (cont’d).

 

 

Site Site Site Site Site
Species Common Name 1 2 3 4 5
Mitella nude naked mitterwort 9.0 2.3 0.4
Monerda fistulose wild bergamot 6.4
Muhlenbergia glamerata spiked muhly 0.4 0.4
Muhlenbergia mexicana Mexican muhly 0.4
Nepeta cateria catnip 0.4 0.8
None no cover 10.8 2.6 5.9 24.2 16.7
Oenothera biennis common evening primrose 0.5
Onoclea sensibilis sensitive fern 8.2 3.4 9.1
Oryzopsis asperifalia roughleaf ricegrass 0.4 3.4 3.0 0.8
Osmarhize berteroi sweet cicely 0.9 4.5 0.4
Osmunda cinnamomea cinnamon fern 1.9 1.0 3.0
Osmunda regalis royal fern 0.4 0.8 0.4
Panicum capillare witchg ress 1.0
Panicum spp panicum spp 2.0
Pamassia palustris grass of pamassus 1.1
Parthenocissus quinquefolia Virginia creeper 0.9 8.3 2.5 1.6
Pedicularis canadensis Canadian lousewort 3.2
Phalaris arundinacea reed canaryg ress 3.0
Phleum pretense timothy 6.4 2.9 0.4
Pilea pumila Canadian cleenrveed 1.7
Piptatherum pungens mountain ricegrass 1.9 2.0 0.4
Piptatherum racemosum blackseed ricegrass 0.9 16.7
Poe palustris fowl bluegrass 3.4
Poe pretensis Kentucky bluegrass 6.0
Polygala paucifolia gaywings 0.5 0.8
Polygonatum spp Solomon's seal spp 0.9 1.3 2.5 1.5 1.2
Prenanthes alba white rattlesnakeroot 3.2 4.4
Prunella vulgaris common selfheal 0.4 0.6 2.3
Pteridium aquilinum bracken fern 12.9 31.4 38.2 7.6 25.0
Pyrola americana American wintergreen 3.2 7.8 9.5
Ranunculus hispidus hispid buttercup 4.3 2.6 0.5
Ranunculus pensylvanicus Pennsylvania buttercup 0.6 0.4
Ranunculus recurvatus blisterwort 0.6
Ribes Iacustre bristly black current 0.6
Rubus spp bleckbeny/respbeny spp 4.3 37.8 27.5 11.4 40.5
Rudbeckia Ieciniata cutleaf coneflower 1.3
Rumex acetosella sheep sorrel 0.6
Rumex obtusifalius broad dock 0.4
Sagittaria latifolia broad leaved arrowhead 0.4
Schaenoplectus americanus chainnaker‘s bulrush 0.4
Scirpus cyperinus woolgrass 0.9 1.3 0.5 1.6
Scutellaria galericulate marsh skullcap 3.9 1.3 0.5 1.5 1.2
Scutellaria Iaten’flore blue skullcap 0.6 2.0
Salenum dulcamara bittersweet nightshade 6.0 1.9
Solidago spp goldenrod spp 2.6 26.3 12.3 9.8 10.7
Sphagnum spp sphagnum moss spp 14.2 41.0 51.0 22.0 20.6
Taraxacum oflicinale common dandelion 0.4 8.3 3.4 0.4
Thalictrum dioicum early meadow rue 5.1 1.0
Thalictrum pubescens king of the meadow 0.4 3.2 2.5 0.4 5.6

128

Table B-3 (cont’d).

 

 

Site Site Site Site Site
Species Common Name 1 2 3 4 5
Thalictrum theiictroides rue anemone 0.4
Toxicadendron redicens poison ivy 0.6 4.9 0.4 1.6
Trientalis barealis sterflower 4.7 3.8 0.5 1.5 6.7
Trifalium spp clover spp 3.2
Trillium cemuum whip-poor-will flower 1.1
Trillium undulatum painted trillium 1.7 5.1 1.0 7.2 0.4
Typha spp cattail spp 0.4 0.4
Unknown spp unknown spp 20.5 3.4 1.2
Vaccinium angustifolium bluebeny 0.6
Verbascum thapsus common mullein 0.6
Verbena hastata blue vervein 0.4
Veronica ofiicinelis common gypsyweed 0.6
Veronica spp speedwell spp 0.4
Viola spp violet spp 1.3 28.2 19.6 9.5 11.1

 

129

Table B-4. Small tree (diameter <10 cm) and shrub species constancy of
occurrence (percent of plots with species present) in JP-ELU sites in northern
Lower Michigan, 2000-2001.

 

 

Site Site Site Site Site
Species Common Name 1 2 3 4 5
Abies balsamea balsam fir 9.5 5.3
Acer rubrum red maple 3.6 47.9 13.5 9.5 10.5
Alnus rugosa speckled alder 21.2 14.3
Amelanchier spp junebeny spp 10.7 70.8 40.4 45.2 10.5
Betula pumila swamp birch 1.9
Camus spp dogwood spp 25.0 2.4
Camus serioea red osier dogwood 13.5 7.1
Crataegus spp hawthorn spp 6.3 3.8
Dasiphara flaribunda shrubby cinquefoil 4.8
Kalmia palifalia pale laurel 1.9
Larix laricina tamarack 2.4
Lanicera hirsute hairy honeysuckle 7.7 4.8
Lanicera spp honeysuckle spp 9.6
Lanicera ablangifalia swamp fly honeysuckle 1.9 2.4
Physocarpus apulifalius ninebark 9.6 9.5
Pinus banksiana jack pine 62.5 20.8 42.3 54.8 73.7
Picea pungens blue spnlce 2.4 2.6
Pinus resinose red pine 43.8 1.9 4.8 2.6
Pinus strabus white pine 5.4 20.8 31.6
Papulus balsamifera balsam poplar 1.9
Papulus grendidentate bigtooth aspen 2.1
Papulus tremuloides quaking aspen 5.8 7.1
Prunus pensylvanica pin cheny 11.9
Prunus serotina black cheny 23.2 66.7 42.3 54.8 42.1
Prunus spp cheny spp 3.8
Prunus virginiana choke cherry 21.2 26.2
Quercus alba white oak 14.6 26.9 7.1 7.9
Quercus rubra red oak 5 10 23.1 7.1 63.2
Rhamnus alnifalia alderleaf buckthom 17.3 4.8
Ribes spp currant spp 5.8
Ribes hirtellum smooth goosebeny 3.8 7.1
Ribes Iacustre bristly black current 3.8
Rose spp wild rose spp 13.5
Salix spp willow spp 1.9
Sambucus nigra common elderbeny 4.8
Spiraea alba narrow leaved meadow sweet 11.5
Unknown spp unknown spp 5.8 5.3
Viburnum spp vibumum spp 1.9
Vibumum apulus cranbeny vibumum 15.4 7.1

 

130

Table B-5. Small tree (diameter <10 cm) and shrub species constancy of
occurrence (percent of plots with species present) in RM-ELU sites in northern
Lower Michigan, 2000-2001.

 

 

Site Site Site Site Site
Species Common Name 1 2 3 4 5
Abies balsamea balsam fir 20.5 45.5 5 18.0 15.2
Acer rubrum red maple 81.8 90.9 70.5 92.0 84.8
Acer saccharum sugar maple 4.0
Alnus rugosa speckled alder 13.6 1 1 .4 12.0
Amelanchier spp junebeny spp 84.1 84.1 79.5 72.0 84.8
Betula papyrifera paper birch 4.5 2.0
Carpinus caroliniana ironwood 2.0
Camus altemifalia altemateleaf dogwood 2.3 6.0
Corylus comuta beaked hazelnut 6.0
Camus spp dogwood spp 11.4 2.0
Camus serioea red osier dogwood 2.3 11.4 2.0
Crataegus spp hewthom spp 2.3 6.8 56.8 8.0
Fagus grandifolia American beech 11.4 22.7 6.5
Fraxinus pennsylvanice green ash 4.5 2.0
Hamamelis virginiana American witchhazel 2.3 4.0 37.0
Larix laricina tamarack 6.8 2.3
Lanicera hirsuta hairy honeysuckle 9.1
Lanicera spp honeysuckle spp 2.3 2.3 63.6 28.0
Physocarpus apulifalius ninebark 4.5
Pinus banksiana jack pine 4.0 6.5
Picea glauca white spruce 6.8 9.1
Picea mariana black spruce 6.8 20.5 12.0
Picea pungens blue spruce 2.3 4.0
Pinus resinose red pine 2.3 13.6 16.0
Pinus strabus white pine 34.1 61.4 40.9 3 73.9
Papulus balsamifera balsam poplar 6.8 9.1 4.0
Papulus grendidentate bigtooth aspen 11.4 6.8 6.0 15.2
Papulus tremuloides quaking aspen 38.6 29.5 68.2 24.0 2.2
Prunus serotina black cheny 84.1 77.3 90.9 84.0 76.1
Prunus spp cheny spp 2.3 4.5
Prunus virginiana choke cheny 72.7 28.0 4.3
Ptelea trifoliete common haptree 2.3
Quercus elbe white oak 4.5 22.7 14.0 87.0
Quercus rubra red oak 88.6 90.9 75.0 84.0 97.8
Rhamnus alnifalia alderieef buckthom 18.2 4.0
Ribes cynasbati prickly goosebeny 9.1 8.0
Ribes Iacustre bristly black current 6.8 2.0
Rose spp wild rose spp 4.5 2.0
Smilax tamnoides bristly greenbrier 2.3
Thuja occidentalis arborvitae 4.5 15.9 8.0
Tilia americana basswood 4.5 2.0 2.2
Tsuga canadensis hemlock 2.3 2.0
Ulmus americana American elm 2.3 4.0

131

Table B-5 (cont’d).

 

 

Site Site Site Site Site
Species Common Name 1 2 3 4 5
Unknown spp unknown spp 15.9 9.1 6.8 2.0 4.3
Vlbumum acerifolium mapleleaf vibumum 2.3 2.3 2.3
WDumum apulus cranbeny vibumum 2.3 2.0
Viburnum rafinesquienum downy arrow wood 2.3
Vrtis riparia riverberigrepe 2.3

 

132

Table 86 Small tree (diameter <10 cm) and shrub species constancy of
occurrence (percent of plots with species present) in SM-ELU sites in northern
Lower Michigan, 2000-2001.

 

 

Site Site Site Site Site
Species Common Name 1 2 3 4 5
Abies balsamea balsam fir 1.8 20.6 16.7 3.2 5.0
Acer pensylvanicum striped maple 2.1
Aoer rubrum red maple 67.9 44.1 43.8 30.6 95.0
Acer saccharinum silver maple 2.1
Acer saccharum sugar maple 76.8 82.4 81.3 91.9 85.0
Acer spicatum mountain maple 35.7 2.1 4.8 1.7
Alnus rugosa speckled alder 10.7 55.9 10.4 4.8 5.0
Amelanchier spp junebeny spp 32.1 70.6 77.1 41.9 8
Betula alleghaniensis yellow birch 2.9 1.6
Betula papyrifera paper birch 2.9 2.1
Carpinus caroliniana ironwood 7.1 58.8 75.0 82.3 43.3
Cephalanthus occidentalis common button brush 2.9
Camus altemifalia altemateleaf dogwood 5.9 45.2 3.3
Corylus comuta beaked hazelnut 17.6 22.9 11.3 3.3
Camus foemina stiff dogwood 8.8
Camus spp dogwood spp 1.8 11.8 16.7 11.3
Camus serioea red osier dogwood 11.8 3.2
Crataegus spp hawthom spp 5.9 4.2
Fagus grandifolia American beech 37.5 29.4 35.4 56.5 21.7
Fraxinus americana white ash 3.6 70.6 95.8 88.7
Fraxinus niga black ash 1.8 14.7 4.2
Fraxinus pennsylvanice green ash 10.7 1 1 .8 20.8 17.7 3.3
Hamamelis virginiana American witchhazel 30.6 3
Larix laricina tamarack 3.2
Lanicera spp honeysuckle spp 8.9 29.4 6.3 21.0 2
Lanicera ablangifalia swamp fly honeysuckle 5.4
Lanicera sempervirens tnlmpet honeysuckle 1.8
None no cover 2.1
Physocarpus apulifalius ninebark 1.8 5.9 2.1
Picea glauca white spruce 2.9 4.2
Picea mariana black spruce 2.1
Pinus strabus white pine 1.8 2.9 8.3
Papulus balsamifera balsam poplar 1.8 2.9 8.1
Papulus grendidentate bigtooth aspen 31.3 5.0
Papulus tremuloides quaking aspen 7.1 44.1 39.6 19.4 28.3
Prunus nigra Canadian plum 1.8
Prunus serotina black cheny 62.5 70.6 5 74.2 85.0
Prunus spp cheny spp 5.9 2.1 3.2
Prunus virginiana choke cheny 37.5 2.9 51.6 55.0
Quercus rubra red oak 16.7 1.6 6.7
Rhamnus alnifalia alderieaf buckthom 1.8 2.9 4.8 3.3
Ribes americanum American black current 5.4 5.9
Ribes cynasbati prickly goosebeny 23.5 14.6 5.0

 

133

Table B-6 (cont’d).

 

 

Site Site Site Site Site
Species Common Name 1 2 3 4 5
Ribes glandulasum skunk current 5.9
Ribes hirtellum smooth goosebeny 11.3
Ribes hudsanianum northern black current 2.9
Ribes Iacustre bristly black current 8.8 21.0
Ribes triste red current 1.8
Salix spp willow spp 5.9 4.8
Sambucus nigra common elderbeny 1.6
Thuja occidentalis arborvitae 1.8
Tilia americana basswood 14.7 60.4 25.8 1
Tsuga canadensis hemlock 5.4 5.9
Ulmus americana American elm 5.4 32.4 14.6 9.7 35.0
Unknown spp unknown spp 1.8 5.9 1.6 1.7
Vibumum acerifolium mapleleaf vibumum 1 1 .8 45.8 16.1
Vibumum spp vibumum spp 1.8 2.1
Viburnum Ientago nennyberry 1.7
Viburnum apulus cranbeny vibumum 8.8 25.8 16.7
Vitis palmata catbifig rape 1.7

 

134

Table B-7. Tree (DBH >10 cm) species constancy of occurrence (percent of
plots with species present) in JP-ELU sites in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-

 

 

2001.

Site Site Site Site Site
Species Common Name 1 2 3 4 5
Abies balsamea balsam fir 2.2 2.5
Acer rubrum red maple 7.8 2.5
Larix laricina tamarack 1.8
None no cover 10.9 2.5
Pinus banksiana jack pine 46.7 29.4 29.1 37.8 42.5
Picea pungens blue spruce 4.4
Pinus resinose red pine 37.3 9.1 8.9 2.5
Pinus strabus white pine 7.8 7.5
Prunus serotina black cheny 3.9
Quercus rubra red oak 13.7 2.5

 

Table B-8. Tree (DBH >10 cm) species constancy of occurrence (percent of
plots with species present) in RM-ELU sites in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-

 

 

2001 .

Site Site Site Site Site
Species Common Name 1 2 3 4 5
Abies balsamea balsam fir 10.9 14.6 3.9 2.0
Aoer rubrum red maple 16.3 19.6 4.2 13.7 20.4
Acer saccharum sugar maple 6.5
Betula papyrifera paper birch 2.2 6.3 2.0
Fraxinus pennsylvanice green ash 2.0
None no cover 9.3 4.1
Pinus banksiana jack pine 4.2 11.8 6.1
Picea mariana black spruce 2.3 5.9
Pinus resinose red pine 4.7 17.4 12.5 17.6 6.1
Pinus strabus white pine 18.6 8.7 31.3 11.8 22.4
Papulus balsamifera balsam poplar 2.3 2.2 4.2
Papulus grendidentate bigtooth aspen 4.7 10.9 10.4 3.9 1 0.2
Papulus tremuloides quaking aspen 14.0 4.3 33.3 7.8
Prunus serotina black cheny 6.3
Quercus alba white oak 18.4
Quercus rubra red oak 13.0 15.7 8.2
Thuja occidentalis arborvitae 4.7 13.0 3.9
Tilia americana basswood 2.0
Tsuga canadensis hemlock 2.3 2.2 6.3 2.0 4.1

 

135

Table B-9. Tree (DBH >10 cm) species constancy of occurrence (percent of
plots with species present) in SM-ELU sites in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-

 

 

2001.

Site Site Site Site Site
Species Common Name 1 2 3 4 5
Abies balsamea balsam fir 7.7 2.0
Acer rubrum red maple 8.6 15.4 3.9 6.1 28.6
Acer saccharum sugar maple 39.7 15.4 25.5 30.3 20.6
Amelanchier spp junebeny spp 1.7
Betula alleghaniensis yellow birch 1.7 5.1 1.5
Betula papyrifera paper birch 5.1 3.9
Carpinus caroliniana ironwood 12.1 17.9 2.0 18.2 17.5
Fagus gandifalia American beech 5.2 2.0 4.5
Fraxinus americana white ash 1.7 7.8 1.5 1.6
Fraxinus nigra black ash 2.6
Fraxinus pennsylvanice green ash 6.9 2.6 1.6
None no cover 2.0 1.6
Picea glauca white spruce 2.6 2.0
Picea mariana black spruce 2.6
Pinus strabus white pine 2.6
Papulus grendidentate bigtooth aspen 17.6
Papulus tremuloides quaking aspen 10.3 12.8 13.6 1 1 .1
Prunus serotina black cheny 3.4 2.6 1.5 4.8
Thuja occidentalis arborvitae 3.4 1.5
Tilia americana basswood 1 .7 1 0.3 1 3.7 21 .2
Tsuga canadensis hemlock 10.3 5.1 1.5
Ulmus americana American elm 2.0
Viburnum spp vibumum spp 2.6

 

136

Table B-10. Average percent cover of herbaceous species (graminoid and forb
cover combined), woody understory (height <2 m) canopy and woody overstory

(height >2 m) canopy in each site in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001.

 

 

 

 

ELU Site Herbaceous Understory Overstory
JP-ELU 1 28.6 (11.0)* 5.4 (5.4) 40.5 (18.8)
2 37.2 (19.8) 5.8 (8.8) 59.5 (24.9)

3 34.3 (18.8) 24.7 (25.3) 31.9 (21.6)

4 34.9 (21.0) 28.6 (22.4) 45.1 (20.3)

5 30.1 (15.6) 10.3 (8.4) 36.9 (18.8)

RM-ELU 1 53.8 (16.5) 19.0 (15.7) 48.6 (29.3)
2 34.1 (20.5) 13.7 (11.7) 71.3 (18.4)

3 52.5 (24.7) 25.4 (21.6) 64.3 (21.5)

4 40.7 (19.8) 11.4 (9.3) 61.5 (20.5)

5 38.8 (17.1) 13.8 (9.8) 61.8 (21.7)

SM-ELU 1 26.9 (31.7) 12.8 (12.9) 79.2 (27.0)
2 37.1 (32.2) 26.7 (17.6) 79.1 (25.3)

3 24.9 (24.0) 30.1 (17.0) 74.6 (27.1)

4 10.7 (24.4) 20.5 (14.1) 86.4 (22.4)

5 20.7 (24.8) 16.2 (10.6) 77.4 (23.2)

 

* One standard deviation in parentheses.

137

APPENDIX C

Vertebrate Species Composition by Site

138

Table C-1. Avian species and number of individuals heard/seen per survey in

JP-ELU sites in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001.

 

 

Site Site Site Site Site
Species Common Name 1 2 3 4 5
Agelaius phoeniceus red-winged blackbird 1.0
Baealaphus bicalar tufted titmouse 1.0
Bambycilla cedrorum cedar waxwing 1.3 0.7 4.0 3.0 8.0
Banasa umbellus ruffed grouse 0.3 0.5
Butarides striatus green-backed heron 0.3
Carduelis tristis American goldfinch 1.0 1.3 3.0 1.0 3.0
Carpadacus purpureus purple finch 0.3 1.0 6.0
Catharus fuscescens veery 5.0 2.7 1.0 4.0
Catharus guttatus hermit thrush 2.7 3.0 3.5 5.0 3.0
Certhia americana brown creeper 0.3 1.0
Ceryle alcyan belted kingfisher 0.3 1.0 1.0
Charadrius vociferus killdeer 0.5
Chordeiles minor common nighthawk 0.5
Caccyzus americanus yellow-billed cuckoo 0.7 0.3 1.0
Caccyzus erythropthalmus black-billed cuckoo 1.0 5.0
Colaptes auratus northern flicker 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Contapus cooperi olive-sided flycatcher 0.5
Contapus virens eastern wood peewee 1.3 0.3 1.5 1.0
Corvus brachyrhynchas American crow 3.0 5.7 5.0 6.0 4.0
Corvus carax common raven 1.3 1.3 5.0 2.0 1.0
Cyenacitte oristete blue jay 12.7 7.7 6.5 12.0 8.0
Dendraica comnata yellow-mmped warbler 0.7 0.3 1.0
Dendraica fusca blackbumian warbler 0.3 3.0
Dendraica magnolia magnolia warbler 2.0 1.3
Dendraica pensylvanica chestnut-sided warbler 1.0 0.5
Dendmica petechie yellow warbler 1.5
Dendraica pinus pine warbler 1.0 0.7 2.0
Dendraica virens black-throeted green warbler 0.5
Dryocapus pileatus pileated woodpecker 2.0 0.3
Duck spp unknown duck spp 1.0 1.0
Dumetella caralinensis grey catbird 0.5 1.0
Empidanax minimus least flycatcher 0.3
Gallinago gallinaga common snipe 0.3 0.3
Geathlypis trichas common yellowthroat 0.3 0.7 1.0 2.0
Hylacichla mustelina wood thrush 0.5
Icterus galbula northern oriole 0.5
Junco hyemalis dark-eyed junco 3.3 1.0 1.5 2.0 7.0
Melanerpes erythrocephelus red-headed woodpecker 2.0 2.0
Meleagris gallopavo wild turkey 0.7 1.0
Melaspiza geargiana swamp sparrow 1.0 2.0
Melaspiza melodia song spa now 1.7 0.7 4.0 2.0
Mniatilta varie black-and-white warbler 2.0 1.0
Molothrus ater brown headed cowbird 0.5
Myiarchus crinitus great crested flycatcher 2.3 1.0 0.5 6.0

 

139

Table C-1 (cont’d).

 

 

Site Site Site Site Site
Species Common Name 1 2 3 4 5
Opammis agilis Connecticut warbler 0.5
Oparamis philadelphia mourning warbler 0.7 1.0
Parula americana northern parula 1.0
Passerina cyanea indigo bunting 1.7
Pheucticus Iudavicianus rose-breasted grosbeak 0.7 0.7 1.0 2.0 1.0
Picaides pubescens downy woodpecker 1.0 1.0 1.0
Picaides villasus hairy woodpecker 0.7
Pipila erythrophthelmus roufaus—sided towhee 0.3 2.0 2.0
Piranga alivacea scariet tanager 0.7 1.3 0.5 3.0
Paecile etn’capillus black-capped chickadee 9.7 4.7 4.0 3.0 8.0
Paaecetes gramineus vesper sparrow 2.0
Quiscalus quiscula common grackle 9.0 2.5
Regulus calendula ruby-crowned kinglet 0.5
Regulus satrapa golden-crowned kinglet 1.7
Sayamis phoebe eastern phoebe 0.7 1.7
Seiurus auracapilla ovenbird 7.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 6.0
Seiurus novebaracensis northern waterthrush 0.5
Setaphaga ruticille American redstart 1.0 1.0
Sialia sialis eestem bluebird 0.5 1.0
Sitta canadensis red-breasted nuthatch 0.3 0.7 0.5
Sitta caralinensis white-breasted nuthatch 0.7 1.3 1.0 5.0
Sphyrapicus varius yellow-bellied sapsucker 1.0
Spizella passerina chipping sparrow 8.0 0.3 3.5 12.0 13.0
Taxostama rufum brown thrasher 1.0 0.7 1.0 1.0
Tragladytes troglodytes winter wren 1.3 1.3 0.5
Turdus migratorius American robin 7.7 8.3 4.5 14.0 7.0
Unknown spp unknown spp 2.7 2.0 0.5 2.0
Vennivora ruficapille Nashville warbler 2.7 4.3 3.0 9.0 7.0
Vireo flavifrons yellow-throated vireo 1.0 0.3 1.0
lfrrea gilvus warbling vireo 1.3 1.0
Vireo alivaceus red-eyed vireo 6.0 1.7 1.0
Woodpecker spp unknown woodpecker spp 1.3 1.3 3.5 1.0
Zenaide macroure mourning dove 0.3 2.5 4.0 3.0
Zonotriohia albicallis white-th roeted sparrow 0.7 3.0 6.0 4.0

 

140

Table 02 Avian species and number of individuals heard/seen per survey in
RM-ELU sites in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001.

 

 

Site Site Site Site Site
Species Common Name 1 2 3 4 5
Ardea heradias great blue heron 0.3
Bambycilla cedrorum cedar waxwing 0.7 0.7 7.0
Banasa umbellus ruffed grouse 0.3 0.7 3.0
Buteo spp unknown hawk spp 0.7
Carduelis tristis American goldfinch 1.3 4.0 2.0 1.0
Carpodecus purpureus purple finch 0.3
Catharus fuscescens veery 4.3 1.0 2.0
Catharus guttatus hermit thrush 5.3 4.0 4.0 2.0 5.0
Ceryle alcyan belted kingfisher 1.0
Caccyzus erythropthalmus black-billed cuckoo 1.0
Colaptes auratus northern flicker 1.3 3.0 2.5 4.0 1.0
Contapus virens eestem wood peewee 1.7 4.0 3.0 4.0 6.0
Corvus brachyrhynchas American crow 0.7 1.0
Corvus carax common raven 2.0 1.7 2.0 2.0
Cyanacitta cristete blue jay 1.0 7.3 11.0 6.0 12.0
Dendraica fusca blackbumian warbler 0.3 2.0
Dendraica magnolia magnolia warbler 0.3
Dendraica pensylvanica chestnut-sided warbler 0.7 1.0
Dendraica petechie yellow warbler 0.3 0.5
Dendraica tigrine Cape May warbler 1.0
Dendraica virens black-throated green warbler 0.7 1.5
Dryocapus pileatus pileated woodpecker 0.7 0.3 2.0
Dumetella caralinensis gray catbird 0.5 1.0 1.0
Gallinago gallinaga common snipe 0.3 0.5
Geathlypis trichas common yellowthroat 0.3 1.0 1.0
Junco hyemalis dark-eyed junco 1.3 0.7
Lanius Iudavicianus loggerhead shrike 0.5
Laxia curvirastra red crossbill 1.0
Melanerpes erythrocephelus red-headed woodpecker 0.3 0.7 1.0
Melaspiza geargiana swamp sparrow 0.3 0.3
Melaspiza melodia song sparrow 2.3 0.3 0.5
Mniatilta varia bleck-and-white warbler 0.7 1.7 0.5 2.0 1.0
Myiarchus crinitus great crested flycatcher 1.7 1.7 1.0 3.0
Oparamis agilis Connecticut warbler 0.3 0.5
Oparamis philadelphia mourning warbler 0.3 0.5
Passerina cyanea indigo bunting 0.5
Pheucticus Iudavicianus rose-breasted grosbeak 2.3 0.3
Picaides pubescens downy wood pecker 0.3 0.3
Picaides villasus hairy woodpecker 0.3 0.3
Piranga alivacea scariet tanager 0.7 0.5 3.0
Paecile atricapillus black-capped chickadee 3.7 3.7 1.5 8.0
Quiscalus quiscula common grackle 2.3 1.0 1.0
Seiurus aurocapilla ovenbird 7.0 4.0 5.0 14.0
Seiurus novebaracensis northern waterthrush 2.0

 

141

Table C-2 (cont’d).

 

 

Site Site Site Site Site
Species Common Name 1 2 3 4 5
Sitta canadensis red-breasted nuthatch 0.3 0.5
Sitta caralinensis white-breasted nuthatch 2.7 3.3 3.5 1.0 4.0
Sphyrapicus varius yellow-bellied sapsucker 2.0 2.7 3.5 7.0
Spizella passerina chipping sparrow 0.3 3.0 5.0 7.0
Tragladytes troglodytes winter wren 1.3 1.0 4.0 6.0
Turdus migratorius American robin 3.7 2.7 3.5 5.0 4.0
Unknown spp unknown spp 2.0 3.7 2.5 3.0
Vennivora ruficepilla Nashville warbler 4.3 3.3 3.5 3.0 2.0
Vireo gilvus warbling vireo 0.3
Vireo alivaceus red-eyed vireo 0.7 1.3 5.5 2.0 7.0
Vireo solitarius solitary vireo 1.3 1.0
Wilsonia canadensis Canada warbler 1.0
Woodpecker spp Unknown woodpecker spp 3.3 5.7 2.5 1.0
Zenaide macroura mourning dove 1.7 1.3 3.0
Zonatrichie albicallis white-th roated sparrow 3.3 3.3 1.5 4.0

 

142

Table C-3. Avian species and number of individuals heard/seen per survey in

SM-ELU sites in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001.

 

 

Site Site Site Site Site
Species Common Name 1 2 3 4 5
Bambycilla cedmrum cedar waxwing 3.0 0.3 0.3 1.0 5.0
Banasa umbellus ruffed grouse 0.3 0.7
Branta canadensis Canada goose 0.3
Carduelis pinus pine siskin 1.0
Carduelis tristis American goldfinch 5.0 0.7 3.0
Carpodecus purpureus purple finch 4.0
Catharus fuscescens veery 3.0 1.3 1.3 8.0 4.0
Catharus guttatus hermit thnlsh 6.0 2.0 1.7 1.0
Certhia americana brown creeper 0.3 1.0 4.0
Ceryle alcyan belted kingfisher 1.0
Caccyzus americanus yellow-billed cuckoo 0.3 1.0
Caccyzus erythmpthalmus black-billed cuckoo 0.3 1.0
Colaptes auratus northern flicker 1.0 0.3 0.3 2.0
Contapus virens eastern wood peewee 6.0 1.3 0.3 1.0 1.0
Corvus brachyrhynchas American crow 4.0 2.0 1.0
Corvus carax common raven 1.0 0.3 1.0
Cyanacitta cristate blue jay 11.0 3.3 5.3 7.0 3.0
Dendmica magnolia magnolia warbler 0.7 2.0
Dendraica pensylvanica chestnut-sided warbler 1.0 3.0 1.3 1.0
Dendraica petechie yellow warbler 3.0 0.3 0.7
Dendraica virens black-throeted green warbler 5.0 2.7 7.0
Dryocapus pileatus pileated woodpecker 0.3
Duck spp unknown duck spp 0.3
Dumetella caralinensis gray catbird 1.0 1.0
Empidanax minimus least flycatcher 4.0
Empidanax trail/ii willow flycatcher 1.0
Eremophila alpestris horned lark 1.0
Geathlypis trichas common yellowthroat 3.0 1.0
Hylacichla mustelina wood thrush 5.0
Icterus galbula northern oriole 2.0
Ixabrychus exilis least bittem 1.0
Lenius Iudavicianus loggerhead shrike 0.3
Meleagris gallopavo wild turkey 1.0
Melaspiza geargiana swamp sparrow 3.0 1.0 1.0
Melaspiza melodia song sparrow 4.0 0.3 1.0
Mniatilta varia black-end-white warbler 1.0 1.7 1.3 7.0
Myiarchus crinitus great crested flycatcher 1.3 0.7 2.0
Oparamis philadelphia mourning warbler 1.0 1.0
Parula americana northem parula 2.0
Pheucticus Iudavicianus rose-breasted grosbeak 1.0 3.0 0.7 1.0
Picaides pubescens downy woodpecker 2.0
Pipila erythrophthalmus roufaus-sided towhee 1.0
Piranga alivacea scanet tanager 5.0 1.3 0.7 1.0 3.0
Paecile atricapillus black—capped chickadee 8.0 3.3 2.0 9.0 8.0

 

143

Table C-3 (cont’d).

 

 

Site Site Site Site Site
Species Common Name 1 2 3 4 5
Quiscalus quiscula common grackle 4.0 0.3
Regulus satrapa golden-crowned kinglet 3.0 0.3
Sayamis phoebe eastern phoebe 1.0 0.3 0.3 3.0
Seiurus auracapilla ovenbird 12.0 1.0 5.7 2.0 16.0
Seiurus novebaracensis northern waterthrush 1.0
Setaphaga ruticille American redstart 1.0
Sitta canadensis red-breasted nuthatch 1.0
Sitta caralinensis white-breasted nuthatch 2.3 1.0 1.0 3.0
Sphyrapicus varius yellow-bellied sapsucker 1.0 1.0 1.0 5.0
Spizella passerina chipping sparrow 2.0 1.0 1.0
Taxostama rufum brown thrasher 1.0
Tragladytes troglodytes winter wren 2.7
Turdus migratorius American robin 9.0 1.3 2.0 8.0
Tyrannus tyrannus eastern kingbird 1.0
Unknown spp unknown spp 3.0 3.3 1.0 6.0 1.0
Vennivora chrysoptere golden-winged warbler 0.3
Vennivora ruficapille Nashville warbler 2.0 3.0 5.3 7.0
Vireo flevifrans yellow-throated vireo 0.3
Wreo gilvus warbling vireo 1.0
Vireo alivaceus red-eyed vireo 2.0 3.7 3.0 1.0 13.0
Ifrreo solitarius solitary vireo 1.0 0.3 1.0
Woodpecker spp unknown woodpecker spp 1.0 1.0 3.0 4.0 1.0
Zenaide macroure mourning dove 1.0 1.0 1.3 1.0
Zonatrichia albicallis white-throated spa rrow 5.0 1.0

 

144

Table C-4. Total number of herpetofauna species occurrences (numbers in
parentheses are incidental sightings) in JP-ELU sites during herpetofauna cover
board searches and area constrained transect searches in northern Lower

Michigan, 2000-2001.

 

 

Site Site Site Site Site
Species Common Name 1 2 3 4 5
Ambystama laterale blue-spotted salamander 2
Bufa americanus americanus eastern American toad (1) (1) (1)
Opheodrys vemalis smooth green snake 1 (1) (1) 1
Plethadon cinereus redback salamander 3
Rana catesbeiana bull frog (2)
Rana clamitans melanota green frag (16) 1
Rana pipiens northem leopard frog (4)

 

Table C-5. Total number of herpetofauna species occurrences (numbers in
parentheses are incidental sightings) in RM-ELU sites during herpetofauna cover
board searches and area constrained transect searches in northern Lower

Michigan, 2000—2001 .

 

 

Site Site Site Site Site

Species Common Name 1 2 3 4 5
Bufa americanus americanus eastern American toad (4) (2) 3 (6) 1 (2) (1)
Heterodan platirhinas eastern hognose snake (1) 1
Plethadon cinereus redback salamander 1 31 (2) 1 2 4 (9)
Pseudacris crucifer crucifer northern spring peeper (1) 4 5

Rana clamitans melanota green frog 1 (1) (1) 1 (2) (1)
Rena sylvatica wood frog 4 (5) 1 (2)
Thamnaphis sirtalis sirtalis eastern garter snake (1) (3) 1

 

Table 06. Total number of herpetofauna species occurrences (numbers in
parentheses are incidental sightings) in SM-ELU sites during herpetofauna cover
board searches and area constrained transect searches in northern Lower

Michigan, 2000-2001.

 

 

Site Site Site Site Site
Species Common Name 1 2 3 4 5
Bufa americanus americanus eastern American toad 39 (3) (6) 1 (3) (4)
Plethadon cinereus redback salamander 38 (5) 17 4 8 (1) 14 (7)
Pseudacris crucifer crucifer northern spring peeper 4 (2) 1
Rana catesbeiana bull frog 1
Rana clamitans melanota green frog 2 (4) (6) 1 1
Rena palustris pickerel frog (1)
Rana sylvatica wood frog (5) 1 (1) (1)
Thamnophis sirtalis sirtalis eastern garter snake 1 (1) 1 (1) (1)
Turtle spp unknown turtle spp (1)

 

145

Table C-7. Total number individuals of small mammal species trapped per trap
night in JP-ELU sites in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001.

 

Site Site Site Site Site

 

Species Common Name 1 2 3 4 5
Blarina brevicauda shorttail shrew 0.004 0.002

Citellus tridecemlineatus thirteen-lined ground squirrel 0.004 0.014 0.010
Clethrianamys gapperi boreal redback vole 0.048 0.035 0.017
Cryptatis parva least shrew 0.002

Glaucomys sabrinus northern flying squirrel 0.004 0.002

Glaucomys valans southern flying squirrel 0.002

Napaeazapus insignis woodland jumping mouse 0.021

Peromyscus maniculatus deer mouse 0.054 0.059 0.041 0.075 0.038
Sarex cinereus masked shrew 0.008
Synapyomys cooperi southern bog lemming 0.002

Tamias striatus eestem chipmunk 0.013 0.059 0.025 0.019
Tamiasciurus hudsanicus red squirrel 0.004 0.002

 

Table C-8. Total number individuals of small mammal species trapped per trap
night in RM-ELU sites in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001.

 

Site Site Site Site Site

 

Species Common Name 1 2 3 4 5
Blarina brevicauda shorttail shrew 0.003 0.008 0.013 0.015 0.008
Condylure cristate starnose mole 0.003

Napaeazapus insignis woodland jumping mouse 0.003 0.003 0.013

Peromyscus maniculatus deer mouse 0.122 0.158 0.213 0.123 0.062
Shrew spp unknown shrew spp 0.003

Synapyomys coaperi southern bog lemming 0.003

Tamias striatus eestem chipmunk 0.012 0.003 0.049 0.100 0.054
Tamiasciurus hudsanicus red squirrel 0.009 0.003

Zapus hudsanius meadow jumping mouse 0.005

 

146

Table C-9. Total number individuals of small mammal species trapped per trap
night in SM-ELU sites in northern Lower Michigan, 2000-2001.

 

Site Site Site Site Site

 

Species Common Name 1 2 3 4 5
Blarina brevicauda shorttail shrew 0.015 0.022 0.006
Clethrianamys gapperi boreal redback vole 0.027

Napaeazapus insignis woodland jumping mouse 0.042 0.035

Peromyscus maniculatus deer mouse 0.027 0.130 0.185 0.011 0.109
Shrew spp unknown shrew spp 0.003

Sarex cinereus masked shrew 0.007 0.002

Tamias striatus eestem chipmunk 0.013 0.048 0.042 0.024
Zapus hudsanius meadowjumping mouse 0.012

 

147

LITERATURE CITED

Albert, D. 1995. Regional landscape ecosystems of Michigan, Minnesota, and
\Msconsin: a working map and classification. St. Paul, Minnesota. US.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, North Central Forest
Experiment Station.

Alfred, S., A. Hyde, and R. Larson. 1973. Soil survey of Emmet County,
Michigan. U. S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service.

Anderson , B., and R. Ohmart. 1986. Vegetation. Pages 639—660 in A.
Cooperrider, R. Boyd, and H. Stuart, editors. Inventory and monitoring of
wildlife habitat. US. Department of Interior, Bureau of Land Management
Service Center, Denver, CO.

Bell, D. 1974. Tree stratum composition and distribution in the streamside
forest. American Midland Naturalist. 92(1): 35-46.

Bendix, J., and C. Hupp. 2000. Hydrological and geomorphological impacts on
riparian plant communities. Hydrological Processes. Special issue:
Linking hydrology and ecology. 14: 2977-2990.

Brink, V. 1954. Survival of plants under flood in the lower Fraser River Valley,
Brittish Columbia. Ecology. 35(1): 94-95.

Burger, T., and J. Kotar. 2003. A guide to forest communities and habitat types
of Michigan. The Department of Forest Ecology and Management,
University of Wisconin-Madison.

Canfield, R. 1941. Application of the line intercept method in sampling range
vegetation. Journal of Forestry. 39: 388-394.

Decocq, G. 2002. Patterns of plant species and community diversity at different
organization levels in a forested riparian landscape. Journal of Vegetation
Science. 13291-106.

Fisher, R., C. Martin, and J. Fischenich. 2000. Improving riparian buffer strips
and corridors for water quality and wildlife. International Conference on
Riparian Ecology and Management in Multi-land Use Watersheds.
American Water Resources Association.

148

Frye, R. II, and J. Quinn. 1979. Forest development in relation to topography
and soils on a floodplain of the Raritan River, New Jersey. Bulletin of the
Torey Botanical Club. 106(4): 334-345.

Fuller, M., and J. Masher. 1981. Methods of detecting and counting raptors: a
review. Pages 235-246 in C. Ralph, and J. Scott (eds) Estimating
numbers of terrestrial birds. Studies in Avian Biology No. 6. Cooper
Ornithology Society. Allen Press, Inc. Lawrence, Kansas.

Hansen, P., R. Pfister, K. Boggs, B. Cook, J. Joy, and D. Hinckley. 1995.
Classification and management of Montana's riparian and wetland sites.
Montana Riparian and Wetland Association. Montana Forest and
Conservation Experiment Station, School of Forestry, University of
Montana, Missoula, Montana.

Hays, R., C. Summers, and W. Seitz. 1981. Estimating wildlife habitat variables.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Biological Services Program,
FWS/OBS-81-47.

Heyer, W., M. Donnelly, R. McDiarmid, L. Hayek, and M. Foster. 1994.
Measuring and monitoring biological diversity. Standard methods for
amphibians. Smithsonian Institute Press, Washington, D. C.

Higgins, K., J. Oldemeyer, K. Jenkins, G. Clambey, and R. Harlow. 1994. Pages
567-591 in T. Bookhout (ed.) Research and management techniques for
wildlife habitats. The Wlldlife Society. Bethesda, Maryland.

Hosner, J. 1958. The effects of complete inundation upon seedlings of six
bottomland tree species. Ecology. 39(2): 371-373.

Hunter, M. 1990. Wildlife, forest, and forestry: Principles of managing forest for
biological diversity. Prentice-Hall, Inc. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.

Hupp, C., and W. Osterkamp. 1985. Bottomland vegetation distribution along
Passage Creek, Virginia, in relation to fluvial landforms. Ecology. 66(3):
670-681.

Kumar, R. 1979. Toe-clipping procedure for individual identification of rodents.
Laboratory Animal Science 29: 679-680.

Lamb, E., and A. Mallik. 2003. Plant species traits across a riparian-zonelforest
ecotone. Journal of Vegetation Science. 14:853-858.

Larson, R., and D. Buchanan. 1978. Soil survey of Antrim County, Michigan. U.
S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service.

149

Manci, K. 1989. Riparian ecosystem creation and restoration: A literature
summary. US. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report. 89(20): 1-59.

McDermott, R. 1954. Effects of saturated soil on seedling growth of some
bottomland hardwood species. Ecology. 35(1): 36-41.

Menges, E., and D. Waller. 1983. Plant strategies in relation to elevation and
light in floodplain herbs. American Naturalist. 122(4): 454-473.

Mikkelsen, K., and l. Vesho. 2000. Riparian soils: Aliterature review. Center for
Streamside Studies. College of Forest Resources, University of
Washington, Seattle, Washington.

Oliver, C., and T. Hinckley. 1987. Species, stand structures, and silvicultural
manipulation patterns for the streamside zone. p. 259-276. In Streamside
management: Forestry and fishery interactions. University of Washington.
College of Forest Resources. Contribution No. 57.

Pabst, R., and T. Spies. 1998. Distribution of herbs and shrubs in relation to
landform and canopy cover in riparian forest of coastal Oregon. Canadian
Journal of Botany. 76: 298-315.

Reed, P. 1988. National List of Plant Species that occur in Wetlands: National
Summary. US Fish & Wildlife Service, Biological Report 88(24).

Robbins, C. 1981. Bird activity levels related to weather. Studies in Avian
Biology. No. 6301-310.

Robertson, P., G. Weaver, and J. Cavanaugh. 1978. Vegetation and tree
species patterns near the northern terminus of the southern floodplain
forest. Ecological Monographs. 48(3):249-267.

Schroeder, R. 1983. Habitat suitability index models: black capped chickadee.
U. S. Department of the Interior. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
FWS/OBS-82/10.37. Fort Collins, Colorado.

Scott, J., and F. Ramsey. 1981. Length of count period as a possible source of
bias in estimating bird densities. Pages 409-413 in C. Ralph, and J. Scott
(eds.) Estimating numbers of terrestrial birds. Studies in Avian Biology
No. 6. Cooper Ornithological Society. Allen Press, Inc. Lawrence,
Kansas.

US. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Natural Resources Conservation Service
(NRCS). 2004. The PLANTS Database, Version 3.5
(http:/Iplants.usda.gov). National Plant Data Center, Baton Rouge, LA
70874-4490 USA.

150

US. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1997. A system for mapping riparian
areas in the western United States. USFWS National Wetlands Inventory.

Van Caller, A., K. Rogers, and G. Heritage. 2000. Riparian vegetation-
environment relationships: complimentarity of gradients versus patch
hierarchy approaches. Journal of Vegetation Science. Vol 11.3.

Verry, E., C. Dolloff, and M. Manning. 2004. Riparian ecotone: Afunctional
definition and delineation for resource assessment. Water, Air, and Soil
Pollution: Focus. 4:67-94.

Waters, J., C. Zabel, K McKelvey, and H. Welsh. 2001. Vegetation patterns
and abundances of amphibians and small mammals along small streams
in a northwestern California watershed. Northwest Science. Vol 75, No.
1:37-52.

Werlein, J. 1998. Soil survey of Crawford County, Michigan. U. S. Department

of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service and Forest
Service.

151

llIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII