Michigan Forest Communities: A field guide and references Bulletins/Michigan... · Michigan Forest Communities A Field Guide and Reference Donald I. Dickmann ... Michigan forest community

MichiganForest

Communities

A Field Guideand Reference

Donald I. Dickmann

MICHIGAN STATEU N I V E R S I T Y

EXTENSION

ISBN No. 1-56525-019-2

© Michigan State University Extension, 2004

MSU is an affirmative-action, equal-opportunity institution. Michigan State University Extensionprograms and materials are open to all without regard to race, color, national origin, gender, reli-

gion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, marital status, or family status. • Issued infurtherance of Extension work in agriculture and home economics, acts of May 8 and June 30,1914, in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Margaret A. Bethel, Extension

director, Michigan State University, E. Lansing, MI 48824.

Donald I. DickmannDepartment of Forestry

Michigan State UniversityEast Lansing, MI 48824-1222


EXTENSION

Michigan Forest Communities: A Field Guide and Reference

3

Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

A short history of Michigan’s forests. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

Ecology of Michigan forests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Glaciation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13Climate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14Forest habitat regions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15Microclimate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16Community dynamics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Michigan forest community types. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

What is a forest community type? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19How are forest communities defined?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20Forest community types in this book . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22Using this guide . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24Checklist of Michigan forest community types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27Checklist of trees native to Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

Part I. Wetland forest communities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

1. Southern deciduous (hardwood) swampsand floodplain forests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

2. Southern relict tamarack swamps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 373. Northern hardwood-conifer swamps. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 414. Northern rich conifer (cedar) swamps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 465 Northern conifer bogs and muskegs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51

CONTENTS

4

Part II. Closed-canopy upland forest communities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56

6. Southern mesic deciduous (maple-beech) forests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 577. Southern dry-mesic deciduous (oak-mixed hardwood) forests . . . . . . 628. Southern dry deciduous (dry oak) forests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 679. Northern mesic hardwood (hemlock-hardwood) forests . . . . . . . . . . . 71

10. Northern dry-mesic oak forests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7811. Northern dry-mesic pine forests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8412. Northern dry pine forests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8913. Boreal (spruce-fir) forests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9414. Dune forest-swale complexes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9815. Northern disturbed (aspen-paper birch) forests. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10216. Plantations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107

Part III. Open canopy upland forest communities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111

17. Southern lakeplain oak-hardwood openings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11218. Southern oak barrens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11719. Northern pine and oak barrens. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12220. Great Lakes barrens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12821. Northern balds, cliffs, and bedrock glades . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13322. Alvar savannas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13723. Pine stump plains . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143

Birds and mammals associated with forest communities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148

Field guides to species identification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149

Additional references . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151

Latin names of shrubs, ground flora, and exotic trees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153

CONTENTS

5

ne does not travel down the trailto a book alone. Many people gaveme help, advice, and counsel along

the way. To all of them I am indebted.Richard Kobe reviewed my initial out-line and gave positive feedback aboutmy approach to the subject. DennisAlbert, Bill Botti, Russell Kidd, DougPearsol, Jan Schultz, and Pat Valenciahelped me locate several forest commu-nities of which I was unaware. I alsothank Jan and Raoul LePage for intro-ducing me to Dead Man’s Hill and thesuperb vista it provides of the JordanRiver Valley. These places have joinedmy list of favorites among Michigan’sforested treasures. Ray Miller allowedme the use of one of the UpperPeninsula Tree Improvement Center’svehicles for travel in that part of thestate. Having piloted myself toEscanaba, I had to find some way totravel on the ground.

I obtained photos from Phil Huber,Kari Brown, Rick Baetsen, the StateArchives of Michigan, and The MichiganNature Conservancy. Most of the photosI took myself and in the process finallybegan to learn the intricacies of my digi-tal camera. The Michigan NaturalFeatures Inventory generously providedvegetation maps of the state. BobDoepker and Craig Albright gave me acopy of the MIWILD (Michigan WildlifeHabitats) CD, which was very useful.

David Rothstein, Dennis Albert, andDoug Pearsol freely gave their time toread and critique the completed manu-

script. Their comments and suggestionsgreatly helped clear up ambiguities anderrors. I sincerely appreciate their efforts.

I am especially appreciative of theclimate of scholarship that exists in theMichigan State University (MSU)Department of Forestry and for the sup-port and encouragement of DanielKeathley, department chair. Once againElwood Ehrle—patron of botanicalresearch and administrator of the HanesFund—came to my aid by granting trav-el funds for necessary fieldworkthroughout the state. This project couldnot have gone forward without the sup-port of Randy Heatley, MSU Agricultureand Natural Resources (ANR) TechnicalServices manager, who agreed at theoutset to cover the publication costs.

The editorial, design, and productionwork of the staff of MSU ANRCommunications & TechnologyServices—Alicia Burnell, Ken Fettig, andLeslie Johnson—requires specialacknowledgment. Their enthusiasm,helpful suggestions, cheery demeanor,and professional attitude always mademe feel very confident about the out-come of this project.

Finally, I thank my wife, KathleenMcKevitt, and our Welsh Corgi, Benny, forcompanionship on various forest treks.They patiently put up with my preoccupa-tion for places forested and willingly stoodby (or sniffed the scents of forest crea-tures) during many photo stops.Occasionally—if the setting was pleas-ing—I could even entice them to pose.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

O

6

orests are the defining naturalfeature of Michigan’s landscape.

Before European settlement began inthe 17th century, forests blanketedapproximately 95 percent of the state’s36.3 million acres. These forests, at firstviewed as an impediment to settlement,soon became a major economic enginefor the state’s development. They con-

tinue in that role today. At the begin-ning of the 21st century, after severalhundred years of human exploitationand deforestation, approximately half ofthe state remains covered by trees. Butthat’s not the whole story. As one trav-els north through the Lower Peninsulaand west through the Upper Peninsula,the land becomes increasingly forested.

INTRODUCTION

F

7

The extremes of this continuum arestriking—only 21 percent of the south-ern Lower Peninsula is occupied bypatchy woods and wetland corridors,whereas 88 percent of the westernUpper Peninsula is covered by exten-sive, largely unbroken forests.

Today’s forests are different in morethan extent from those that providedfood, shelter, fuel, and a host of otherbenefits to the state’s native people andthen to the European immigrants whodispossessed them. Most of our currentforests are relatively young, havingregrown following the devastating, cen-tury-long period of logging and fire thatbegan about the time Michigan becamea state in 1837. Many of these second-growth forests have been harvestedagain, with a third-growth underway.Thus, ancient or old-growth forests,which were common two centuries ago,now are rare. Many of the magnificent

pine forests of yesteryear have beenreplaced with woodlands dominated byaspen or oaks. Open savanna forestsand barrens have virtually disappeared.Yet in spite of these changes, Michigan’sforests remain robust and incrediblydiverse. In fact, Michigan contains morevegetation types than any other state inthe Midwest (Faber-Langendoen 2001).

Although changes in the state’s for-est cover over the past two centuriesare largely due to human action, theyillustrate an important ecological princi-ple that would hold even if no humansoccupied Michigan’s pleasant peninsu-las: forests are dynamic, not static.Thus, we can sustain and protectforests, but we cannot preserve them.Preservation implies retaining some-thing in a facsimile of its present condi-tion, such as canning a peach or freez-ing a salmon. In fact, changes will occurin our favorite woods whether we like it

Forests are continually changing, usually slowly, but sometimes abruptly. Here a tornado was theinstrument of change.

INTRODUCTION

A SHORT HISTORY OF MICHIGAN FORESTS

10

he diverse forests that cover muchof the Michigan landscape are the

culmination of many thousands of yearsof development. Their history beginswith the slow melting and retreat of theWisconsin glacier, a portentous eventthat marked the end of the greatPleistocene Ice Age. The spoil leftbehind by the retreating glacier repre-sented a biological vacuum; plants andanimals that had marked time for mil-lennia in ice-free areas south of the gla-cier lost no time in moving north toinvade the vacated landscape. Amongthese first plants were several types oftrees, the ancestors of today’s Michiganforests.

T The glacier began its retreat about14,000 years ago. Most of the LowerPeninsula was ice-free about 2,000years later (Kapp 1999). At this time anarrow belt of tundra and scatteredclumps of spruce and tamarack occu-pied much of the northern LowerPeninsula, with closed boreal forests ofspruce, fir, birch, and poplar to thesouth. After the passage of another2,000 years, the glacial margin hadreceded almost to the shore of LakeSuperior in the Upper Peninsula. Borealconifers still dominated in the north,but now the southern part of the statewas occupied by more complex pine-

Spruce and tamarack forests were among the first to establish after the Wisconsin glacier receded.

11

hardwood forests on the uplands andswamp forests inland from Saginaw Bayand lakes St. Clair and Erie.Approximately 3,500 years ago,Michigan forests began to take on a lookthat would be familiar to today’s observ-er, though species such as beech andhemlock, which migrated northwardslowly, probably still would have beenuncommon in the Upper Peninsula.

Humans have continuously occupiedMichigan’s forests almost from their icybeginnings. Through the processes ofcultural evolution and migration, thesePaleo-Indian people became the nativetribes—mostly Ojibwe, Odawa, andBodewademi—encountered by the firstFrench explorers in the 17th century.Indian people intensively used theforests they lived in for their dailyneeds. They also cleared land for agri-culture and set fires, some of whichburned over large areas. But because

the tribal populations were relativelysmall and their ethical attitude towardsthe land was beneficent, their overallimpacts were negligible. That allchanged when the flood of immigrantsfrom Europe and the eastern states intoMichigan began in the early 19th cen-tury. These people brought with them anew, three-faceted plan for land andforests: get rid of the Indians, exploitMichigan’s prime timber for economicgain, and clear the land for farming. Sobegan the sorriest chapter in Michigan’sforest history.

During the last half of the 19th andthe first decades of the 20th centuries,the Euro-Christian plan was carried outwith a vengeance. Indian people,already decimated by European dis-eases to which they had little resist-ance, were killed, swindled out of theirland birthright, or forcibly moved tolocations outside the state. Meanwhile,

From about 1850 to 1910, virtually all of Michigan’s virgin forests were cut down or destroyed by wildfires.

A SHORT HISTORY OF MICHIGAN FORESTS

Photo courtesy of State Archives of Michigan.

13

o understand Michigan forestcommunities, we must have some

notion of the ecological factors thatcause one community to differ fromothers. These factors include elementsof geology, climate, and biology (includ-ing humans), which all interact to formforest habitats. These habitats and thecommunities of organisms that occur inthem are together referred to asecosystems.

Glaciation

The lasting imprint of thePleistocene Ice Age is the underlyingphysical factor that determinesMichigan forest habitats and the vegeta-tion that grows in them. At its farthestextension some 16,000 years ago, thegreat Wisconsin glacier covered all ofMichigan. Therefore, every habitat inthe state is glacially derived, eitherdirectly or indirectly. The glacier leftbehind numerous landforms that direct-ly influence the type and distribution offorest communities:

• Ice-contact features were formed bydirect action of the glacier and varyfrom steeply hilly to gently rolling.They include moraines, drumlins,kames, eskers, crevasse fillings, andtill plains. The material that makesup these features—glacial till—con-sists of variable, unstratified (unlay-ered) mixtures of clay, sand, gravel,and rocks.

• Outwash plains were formed by theaction of braided meltwater streamsflowing from beneath the glacier. Theyare flat or gently rolling and consist ofstratified or layered glacial sediments,mostly sand and gravel.

• Partially buried ice blocks that brokeoff from the glacier formed depres-sions in outwash or till plains calledkettles. When the ice melted, lakes orponds formed. Many kettles havefilled in with partially decayed vegeta-tion (muck or peat), forming bogs orswampy wetlands.

ECOLOGY OF MICHIGAN FORESTS

T

MoraineTill PlainOutwash PlainLacustrine Plain

The surface of Michigan consists entirely of for-mations that were directly or indirectly derivedfrom the Wisconsin glacier.

Reprinted from Atlas of Michigan

Properties Ecological Habitats

Xeric Dry – Mesic Wet – Hydric*mesic mesic

Average Very dry Somewhat Moist Very moist; Very wetmoisture during dry water maythe growing stand inseason spring

Drainage Excessively Very well- Well- Somewhat Very poorlydrained drained drained poorly drained or

drained undrained

Surface soil Sand to Loamy Sandy Loam to Sand to clay textures loamy sand sand to loam to clay loam loam or organic

sandy loam loam (muck or peat)

Natural fertility Infertile Moderately Very Fertile to Moderately infertile to fertile moderately fertile to veryfertile fertile infertile

14

• The melting glacier formed largelakes, most of which drained to formflat or undulating, silty or sandy lakebeds or lacustrine plains. Lake bedsalso were exposed when the land,relieved of the tremendous weight ofthe glacier, rose along shallow shoresof the Great Lakes and the water lev-els of the lakes dropped.

• In some places—especially in theUpper Peninsula—underlyingbedrock, scraped and polished by theglacier, was exposed.

• Long after the glacier was gone, waveaction and on-shore winds causedsand dunes to form along the shores

of the Great Lakes and some inlandlakes.

Climate

During the millennia following theretreat of the glacier, climate—the sumtotal of sunlight, precipitation, wind,and atmospheric deposition—has actedupon exposed landforms, modifyingthem in various ways. Glacial till hasbecome weathered by the action of cli-mate and the organisms that havegrown in it to become soil. Water ero-sion and stream action have depositedsoils in downslope positions and deltas.Wind has created dunes. Thus, the rawspoil left by the glacier has been trans-

ECOLOGY OF MICHIGAN FORESTS

* Hydric habitats are very complex and variable. Swamps or fens fed by flowing groundwater or surfacestreams may be relatively fertile and productive, although tree growth is limited by anoxic (oxygen-deficient) conditions in the soil for all or part of the growing season. On the other extreme, the thickpeat soil of bogs and muskegs is strongly acid and saturated with stagnant water that is low in dis-solved oxygen, severely limiting tree growth. Many hydric habitats also exist between these extremes.

Table 1. Soil properties in relation to the continuum of ecological habitats.

19

What is a forest community type?

First of all, what is a forest? I defineit as a community whose dominantplants—in size, not number—are trees.Trees may be dense and closely spaced,creating a continuous overstory canopyand deep shade at ground level (closedforest). In old, mature closed forests,several layers of subcanopy trees oftenare present under the overstory, alongwith a well-developed ground flora. Onthe other extreme, trees may be widelyspaced or scattered, with a discontinu-ous canopy that permits lots of sun toreach the ground (open forest or

savanna). In the spaces among thetrees, a prairie or meadow flora flour-ishes. A more or less continuous grada-tion between these forest extremesexists. Forests also have a minimumsize—usually large enough to complete-ly eliminate environmental “edgeeffects” in the forest interior. Howeverinteresting, a fencerow, roadside strip oftrees, or small patch of trees (less than1 or 2 acres) in open land is not con-sidered a forest in the context of thisguidebook. Finally, forests are wild.Woodlands that are continually dis-turbed by livestock grazing, herbicidespraying, mowing, or trampling are notconsidered in this discussion.

MICHIGAN FOREST COMMUNITY TYPES

The community types described in this book are based on mature forest characteristics.

20

A forest community type is a broad-ly defined ecosystem—a varied andcomplex assemblage of plants, animals,and other organisms living together in acommon habitat (Barnes et al. 1998).Fundamentally, naming and describinga community type is an attempt to puta segment of the natural world in a box,always a tenuous process fraught withmany pitfalls. These pitfalls should bediscussed before we proceed anyfurther.

How are forest communities defined?

Forest community types are definedprincipally by their characteristic treespecies. This practice does not implythat the organisms associated withthese trees are somehow less importantecologically. Trees are large and struc-turally dominant, and they may havemonetary value or aesthetic appeal;thus we focus on them. But in the natu-ral world, every organism plays animportant role. Forest communities areincredibly diverse, consisting of thou-sands—maybe even millions—of kindsof organisms, from one-celled microbesto huge, complex trees. Michigan con-tains approximately 1,800 native plants,with another 800 non-native (exotic)plants added to the mix. Unfortunately,only a few of the best known and mostrecognizable plants can be included inmy description of each type. Further-more, each person’s background andinterests influence his or her choice ofwhat organisms should be included inthe description (e.g., see Hoffman 2002and Kricher 1998).

A second difficulty with forest typ-ing concerns the inevitable variationthat occurs in the field. Forested land-scapes present a continuum of vegeta-tion; the transition from one type toanother is sometimes gradual, some-times abrupt. How should we handletransition communities? In addition,microsites with an entirely different


Decay organisms are essential members of forestcommunities.

24

and current extent of rare forest typesfrom Michigan Natural FeaturesInventory community abstracts. Otherreferences to certain types are cited inthe text.

Using this guide

Types are organized into three cate-gories — I. wetland, II. closed-canopyupland, and III. open-canopy upland—with southern communities describedfirst, then northern communities. Aftera short description of the habitat, I listthe signature overstory trees and someof their tree associates. Lists of under-story woody plants, herbs, orchids,ferns, grasses, and sedges follow, butthey are less inclusive and are notmeant to be diagnostic. Rather, I havetried to assemble compilations of theplants that an observer is most likely toencounter or to recognize easily,

depending on the season of observation.Exotic invasives are followed by anasterisk. A rigorous examination of anycommunity will uncover some under-story ground flora species that I haveomitted or some that should be therebut are missing. There always are sur-prises in the natural world—that’s halfthe fun of being out there!

The Michigan map included witheach community type description colorsthe counties in which the type is mostlikely to be found. Some counties, natu-rally, will contain more of the type thanothers. The text that accompanies themaps provides more information ontype distribution. The approximatelocations of key viewing areas, wheregood examples of a particular communi-ty type can be visited, also are given inthe text.


After the name of each community type, a code indicates how common it is across the state:

= widespread; type very common in one or several regions orthroughout the state, with many examples close at hand.

= local; type confined to a specialized habitat in a particular regionor regions of the state, yet not hard to find.

= rare; type very uncommon and highly localized in the state, with very few examples.

W

L

R

27

Type✔ number Name Page

I. Wetland forest communities

1 Southern deciduous swamps and floodplain forests 32

2 Southern relict tamarack swamps 37

3 Northern hardwood-conifer swamps 41

4 Northern rich conifer (cedar) swamps 46

5 Northern conifer bogs and muskegs 51

II. Closed-canopy upland forest communities

6 Southern mesic deciduous (maple-beech) forests 57

7 Southern dry-mesic deciduous (oak-mixed hardwoods)forests 62

8 Southern dry deciduous (dry oak) forests 67

9 Northern mesic hardwood (hemlock-hardwood) forests 71

10 Northern dry-mesic oak forests 78

11 Northern dry-mesic pine forests 84

12 Northern dry pine forests 89

13 Boreal (spruce-fir) forests 94

14 Dune forest-swale complexes 98

15 Northern disturbed (aspen-paper birch) forests 102

16 Plantations 107

III. Open-canopy upland forest communities

17 Southern lake-plain oak-hardwood openings 112

18 Southern oak barrens 117

19 Northern pine and oak barrens 122

20 Great Lakes barrens 128

21 Northern balds, cliffs, and bedrock glades 133

22 Alvar savannas 137

23 Pine stump plains 143


✔ Checklist of Michigan Forest Community Types

28

Common name Latin name

Gymnosperms (Conifers)

❑ Eastern white pine Pinus strobus❑ Red pine Pinus resinosa

(Norway pine)

❑ Jack pine Pinus banksiana❑ White spruce Picea glauca❑ Black spruce Picea mariana❑ Balsam fir Abies balsamea❑ Eastern hemlock Tsuga canadensis❑ Tamarack Larix laricina

(eastern larch)

❑ Northern white Thuja cedar occidentalis

❑ Eastern red cedar Juniperus virginiana

Angiosperms (Deciduous hardwoods)

❑ Black willow Salix nigra❑ Peachleaf willow Salix

amygdaloides

❑ Balsam poplar Populus balsamifera

❑ Eastern Populus deltoidescottonwood

❑ Swamp cotton Populus wood (E)** heterophylla

❑ Bigtooth aspen Populus grandidentata

❑ Quaking aspen Populus tremuloides


❑ Yellow birch Betula alleghaniensis

❑ Paper birch Betula papyrifera❑ American beech Fagus grandifolia

White oak group:

❑ White oak Quercus alba❑ Swamp white Quercus bicolor

oak

❑ Bur oak Quercus macrocarpa

❑ Chinkapin oak Quercus muehlenbergii

Red oak group:

❑ Red oak Quercus rubra❑ Scarlet oak Quercus coccinea❑ Shumard oak Quercus

shumardii

❑ Northern pin Quercusoak (Hill’s oak) ellipsoidalis

❑ Pin oak Quercus palustris❑ Black oak Quercus velutina❑ Shingle oak Quercus

imbricaria

❑ American Castanea dentatachestnut (E)**

❑ Black walnut Juglans nigra❑ Butternut Juglans cinerea❑ Bitternut hickory Carya

cordiformis

❑ Pignut hickory Carya glabra


✔ Checklist of Trees Native to Michigan*

29


❑ Shellbark hickory Carya laciniosa❑ Shagbark hickory Carya ovata❑ Sugar maple Acer saccharum❑ Black maple Acer nigrum❑ Red maple Acer rubrum❑ Silver maple Acer

saccharinum

❑ Boxelder Acer negundo❑ White ash Fraxinus

americana

❑ Black ash Fraxinus nigra❑ Green ash Fraxinus

(red ash) pennsylvanica

❑ Blue ash Fraxinus quadrangulata

❑ Pumpkin ash Fraxinus(T)** profunda

❑ Basswood Tilia americana❑ Yellow poplar Liriodendron

(tulip poplar) tulipifera

❑ Black cherry Prunus serotina❑ American elm Ulmus

americana

❑ Slippery elm Ulmus rubra❑ Rock elm Ulmus thomasii❑ Hackberry Celtis

occidentalis

❑ Ohio buckeye Aesculus glabra❑ Honey locust Gleditsia

triacanthos

❑ Kentucky coffee Gymnocladus tree dioicus

❑ Black gum Nyssa sylvaticavar. sylvatica


❑ Sycamore Platanus occidentalis

❑ Sassafras Sassafrasalbidum

❑ Red mulberry Morus rubra

Small hardwood trees and large shrubs

❑ Pussy willow Salix discolor❑ Shining willow Salix lucida❑ Bog birch Betula pumila❑ Blue beech Carpinus

(musclewood) caroliniana

❑ Hop hornbeam Ostrya (ironwood) virginiana

❑ Speckled alder Alnus rugosa❑ Dwarf chinkapin Quercus

oak prinoides

❑ Striped maple Acer pensylvanicum

❑ Mountain maple Acer spicatum❑ Pin cherry Prunus

pennsylvanica

❑ Choke cherry Prunus virginiana

❑ Wild plum Prunus americana

❑ Canada plum Prunus nigra❑ Wild crabapple Malus coronaria❑ Juneberries Amelanchier spp.

(serviceberries)

❑ Hawthorns Crataegus spp.❑ American Sorbus

mountain ash americana


✔ Checklist of Trees Native to Michigan*

31

The glacial landforms ofMichigan, combined with nor-

mally abundant rainfall, have pro-duced an abundance of hydric (wet)habitats. Many of these habitatssupport closed- or open-canopyforests. Hydric habitats are especial-ly common in the southern LowerPeninsula and eastern UpperPeninsula (regions I and III),although by no means are they limit-ed to these areas. Hydric habitatsresult from poor internal soildrainage (e.g., former Great Lakebeds, filled ponds [kettles] and lakes,depressions embedded in uplandhabitats, or valley bottoms); the highwater tables adjacent to streams,rivers, ponds, and lakes; or a combi-nation of both. Surface soils may bemineral or organic (muck or peat).Often hydric habitats have a distinctseasonality—water may stand orflow from early spring through mid-summer, followed by a dry periodthat extends into the fall. Soils satu-rated with water are anoxic (defi-cient in oxygen), which is stressful

to plants, especially if the water isstagnant. The plants that inhabitwetland communities, therefore, areuniquely adapted to cope with thisstress. Many wetland plants can suc-cessfully compete only in hydricenvironments, and their distributionis limited to such places. Certainother wetland species are more cos-mopolitan in their habitat toler-ances, and they also successfullycompete on uplands.

Wetlands are protected underSection 404 of the federal CleanWater Act of 1972 and Part 303 ofthe Michigan Natural Resources andEnvironmental Protection Act of1994 (P.A. 451). These acts regulatethe discharge of pollutants into wet-lands, the building of dams and lev-ees, infrastructure development, andthe draining of wetlands for farming,forestry, or other purposes. Thus,compared with upland forests, wet-lands enjoy some legislative buffer-ing from destructive humanactivities.




W

L

R

Part I.Wetland Forest Communities

Habitat

The southern Lower Peninsula(Region I) contains about 30 majorrivers and their tributaries, plus numer-ous short streams that drain directly tothe Great Lakes (Sommers 1977). Theirfloodplains are home to this forest type.Additionally, extensive areas of poorlydrained former lake bed that are sea-sonally inundated extend inland forconsiderable distances from SaginawBay, Lake St. Clair, and Lake Erie.Countless wet depressions also dot thelandscape of this region. It is no wonderthat early European explorers described

this part of the state as a mosquito-infested swamp. Ditching and tiling bylocal drainage districts and filling bydevelopers, however, has substantiallyreduced the area of wetland, and thistrend continues. Nonetheless, hydrichabitats still abound.

The soils of forested wetlands extendover a wide range of textures, from sandto clay, but all are poorly drained withneutral to slightly acid pH. Because rootsystems in these frequently saturatedsoils are shallow, tree windfalls are com-mon. Hydric swamp or floodplain habi-tats may be sharply defined by banks,

32

Southern Deciduous (Hardwood)Swamps and Floodplain Forests W1

33

terraces, or sloughs, or they may gradu-ally rise to an adjoining upland.Transition habitats can be complex,containing a mixture of species adaptedto both wetlands and uplands.

Signature trees

The following species are nearlyalways present in some combination,although elms have been greatlyreduced in importance and stature byDutch elm disease:

• Silver maple• Red maple• Green ash• Black ash (swamp species)• American elm• Eastern cottonwood• Black willow (very tolerant of

saturated soils and frequentlygrows at water’s edge)

Other trees

• Quaking aspen• Peachleaf willow• Boxelder• Swamp white oak • Bur oak• Slippery elm• Yellow birch

Tree diversity in this type generallydeclines from south to north becausemany tree species reach the northernlimit of their natural range in southernMichigan. North of the latitude ofLansing (42 degrees), most of thesesouthern species begin to drop out.

Thus floodplains, other wetlands, andtheir transition habitats in the lowertwo tiers of counties may contain, inaddition to the species listed above:

• Butternut• Black walnut• Ohio buckeye• Sycamore• Hackberry• Pin oak• Shagbark hickory• Bitternut hickory• Black gum• Blue ash• Honey locust• Kentucky coffee tree• Red mulberry • Swamp cottonwood

Southern Swamps and Floodpla ins

Seasonally wet silver maple woodland.

36

Distribution and status

Wetland forest communities arevery common throughout southernMichigan (more than 1.6 million acres);a short drive from any location willreveal several examples. Occasionaloccurrences of this type also may befound in Region II—e.g., the middlereaches of the Muskegon River—oralong the Menominee River in theextreme southern Upper Peninsula(Region III). Although some of the landformerly occupied by this type has beendrained for agriculture and filled forurban development (e.g., much of thegreater Detroit area), overall wetlandforests are in no immediate danger.

Key viewing areas

• Indian Springs Metropark (OaklandCounty northwest of Pontiac).

• Kalamazoo River floodplain, AlleganState Game Area (Allegan Countywest of Allegan).

• Waterloo State Recreation Area(Jackson and Washtenaw countiesnortheast of Jackson).

• Nan Weston Nature Preserve atSharon Hollow, Michigan NatureConservancy (Washtenaw Countysouthwest of Chelsea).

• Red Cedar River floodplain, HarrisNature Center (Ingham County south-east of Okemos).

• Shiawassee National Wildlife Refugeand Shiawassee River State GameArea (Saginaw County southwest ofSaginaw).

Forest Community Type 1

Southern DeciduousSwamps and Floodplain

Forests

Uses and management

Most tree species in this type havelow timber value. Nonetheless, sometimber in deciduous wetland forests ismanaged and harvested, provided nec-essary permits are secured and bestmanagement practices (BMP) are fol-lowed. Logging typically is limited towinter and late summer because ofaccessibility constraints. Some firewoodcutting also occurs. Trapping and hunt-ing of waterfowl, woodcock, ruffedgrouse, and deer are widely practiced inmany of these communities. The bestuse of deciduous wetland forests is theprotection of the water resources thatproduce them and the unique biotaassociated with them.

WETLAND FOREST COMMUNITIES

37

Habitat

These unique forested peatlands canbe found in depressions, stream head-waters, and drainageways throughoutsouthern Michigan. Underlying mucksoils are neutral in pH, but surface peatlayers are acidic. Their hydrology ismaintained by calcareous groundwater.Disturbance agents include windthrow,fire, beaver flooding, and insect out-breaks. Never extensive, they contrastwith the pervading deciduous uplandand wetland communities. Ecologically,these swamps are islands set in amatrix of urban development, decidu-ous woodlands, and agricultural fields.

Signature tree

One deciduous conifer (the only onenative to Michigan) dominates thisforest type:

• Tamarack

Other trees

• Red maple• Silver maple• Yellow birch• Black ash• American elm• Quaking aspen• Swamp white oak• Ohio buckeye

Southern Relict Tamarack Swamps L2

38

• Northern white cedar (occasionally)• White pine (rarely)• Black spruce (rarely)

Associated plants

The shrub and vine component ofthis community is abundant and diversebecause of the open tamarack canopy:

• Poison sumac • Nannyberry• Bog birch• Alder-leaved buckthorn• Glossy buckthorn*• Pussy willow• Spicebush• Mountain holly• Michigan holly• Gray dogwood• Pale dogwood

Tamarack’s autumn gold.

Poison sumac


40

• Sensitive fern• Royal fern• Marsh shield fern

* Exotic (non-native)


Although not common, relict coniferswamps are scattered across the south-ern Lower Peninsula. Because the domi-nant trees are not economically impor-tant, they are in no danger from humanoverexploitation. Nonetheless, drainageand disruption of local hydrology byhuman activities are threats, and collec-tors have depleted populations of sever-al orchids.

Key viewing areas

• Kensington Metropark (OaklandCounty east of Brighton).

• Highland State Recreation Area(Oakland County west of Pontiac).

• Pinckney and Waterloo state recre-ation areas (Jackson and Washtenawcounties north and west of Chelsea).

• Rose Lake Wildlife Research Area(Clinton and Shiawassee countiesnortheast of Lansing).

• Binder Park Zoo (Calhoun Countysouth of Battle Creek).

Uses and management

These wetlands are not managed fortimber or other purposes except forsome occasional firewood cutting(tamarack wood is the heaviest amongMichigan conifers). Orchid collectingdoes occur, but it is illegal. These singu-lar southern forests are best left alonefor wetland protection and to providevaluable habitat for resident plants andanimals.


Southern RelictTamarack Swamps

Wapato (arrowhead).


41

Habitat

Essentially a northern variation ofsouthern deciduous swamps (Type 1),these poorly drained, seasonally inun-dated communities are found on flood-plains, glacial lake plains, and morainalstream headwaters. Slightly acid to neu-tral soils are sandy to sandy loam intexture or shallow (occasionally deep)muck over a mineral substrate. As inmost wetland forests, windthrow oflarge trees is common because rootingdepth is restricted by seasonally anoxic

conditions. Bleached elm skeletons, vic-tims of Dutch elm disease, also arecommon.

Signature trees

Hardwoods dominate these swamps,sometimes to the nearly completeexclusion of conifers:

• Black ash• Green ash• White ash• Yellow birch• American elm

Northern Hardwood-Conifer Swamps W3

43

Some important herbs include:

• Creeping snowberry• Wood nettle• Stinging nettle• Water-horehound• Skunk cabbage• Marsh marigold• Golden ragwort• Rough-leaved goldenrod• Enchanter’s nightshade• Mad-dog skullcap• Goldthread• Marsh skullcap• Wild mint• Spotted touch-me-not• Swamp milkweed• Joe Pye weed

• Bedstraws• Smooth white violet• Wild lily-of-the-valley• Blue flag iris• Wapato • Sedges• Shield fern• Maidenhair fern• Cinnamon fern• Sphagnum moss


This is a common wetland typecharacteristic of the Region I-II transi-tion zone and northward through thenorthern Lower Peninsula (approxi-mately 500,000 acres) and the UpperPeninsula (approximately 350,000acres). Because it is so widespread, oflittle economic importance, and not

Hardwood-Coni fer Swamps

Rough-leaved goldenrod.


Northern Hardwood-Conifer Swamps

46

Habitat

Found along streams and drainage-ways; adjacent to inland lakes; in aban-doned embayments and interdunalswales along the Great Lakes; and alsoin depressions in outwash plains, tillplains, and lake plains, these forests area defining feature of northern Michiganlandscapes. Organic muck or peat soilsare acid at the surface, but subsurfacesoil layers may be neutral or slightlyalkaline in pH, especially where theyoverlie limestone or dolomitic bedrock(e.g., along the Lake Huron shore in the

northeastern Lower Peninsula andthroughout the eastern UpperPeninsula). Structure and compositionof these forests are strongly influencedby a constant flow of cold, mineral-richgroundwater through the soil. Treestend to be very shallow rooted becauseof saturated soils. Wind, therefore, isthe major disturbance, typically creat-ing an untidy tangle of uprooted andleaning trees. Fires are rare, occurringonly after prolonged periods of drought.These swamps are one of the mostfloristically diverse forest communitiesin Michigan.

Northern Rich Conifer (Cedar) Swamps W4

56

The extensive uplands ofMichigan are largely of glacial

origin. They include hilly ice-contactfeatures—moraines, kames, eskers,drumlins, and crevasse fillings—aswell as flat or gently undulating tillplains, outwash plains, and well-drained former lakebeds. Near theshore of Lake Michigan and in someinland areas, wind-shaped sanddunes also are a distinctive feature.In the highlands of the westernUpper Peninsula, ancient bedrockforms prominent, mountainousridges. Surface soils in mesic or wet-mesic habitats are medium- toheavy-textured (sandy loams to clayloams), and internal soil drainage issufficient to prevent water fromstanding for any extended period.

Dry-mesic or xeric (very dry) habi-tats are typified by sandy or gravellysurface soils with rapid internaldrainage. Plant water stress canquickly develop in these excessivelydrained habitats. The closed forests(i.e., those with a more or less con-tinuous overstory tree canopy) thatoccupy these varied habitats areextremely diverse. Local differencesin climate and history add theirinfluence to habitat variation to cre-ate the state’s fascinating and diversemosaic of upland forest communi-ties.

Part II.Closed-Canopy Upland Forest

Communities




W

L

R

57

Habitat

It doesn’t get any better than mesic,especially southern mesic. Forestsoccupying these habitats are the mostspecies-rich and productive in the state.Terrain—consisting of till plains, endmoraines, and old lake plains—is levelto rolling. Soils are deep, loamy, gener-ally well-drained, and fertile. Within 10to 20 miles of the Great Lakes, thehumid climate also permits mesicforests to thrive on stabilized sanddunes. It is no wonder that much of thepre-European settlement mesic forest ofsouthern Michigan was cleared for farm-ing. Today, after a century and a half

(more or less) of cultivation, these areasstill are our most productive agricultur-al land. Straight-line winds are themajor natural disturbance in mesicforests; in mature stands, uprooted orwind-snapped trees are common.Tornadoes and ice storms cause moreextensive damage but are less common.

Signature trees

Mesic southern forests always con-tain one or both of our most toleranthardwood species:

• Sugar maple• American beech

Southern Mesic Deciduous (Maple-Beech) Forests W6

58

Sugar maple usually dominates inthe richest mesic habitats, whereasbeech is better adapted to sandy soils orthose with somewhat poor internaldrainage. But it is common to find bothspecies growing together. Seedlings andsaplings of sugar maple usually predom-inate in the understory.

Other trees

Several other trees, which canbecome quite large, also may occupy amajor part of the overstory but rarelyestablish in the understory of matureforests unless wind or logging opens agap in the canopy:

• Red oak• White oak• Bur oak• Chinquapin oak• White ash

• Tulip poplar• Basswood• Black cherry• Red maple• Bitternut hickory• Black walnut• Sassafras• White pine • Hemlock (this and the preceding

species occasionally near LakeMichigan and in the Region I-IItransition zone)

Associated plants

The richness of mesic habitats isreflected in a high understory diversity.Small trees, shrubs, and vines mayinclude:

• Blue beech• Hop hornbeam• Choke cherry

Sugar maple — Michigan’s most valuable tree.

CLOSED-CANOPY UPLAND FOREST COMMUNITIES

60

• Pokeweed• Blue cohosh • Blue-stem goldenrod• Beech drops• Hairy Solomon seal• False spikenard• Showy orchis• Fowl manna grass• Wide-leaved sedge• Lady fern


Maple-beech forests are the mostcommon forest type in southernMichigan. The largest area occurs inVan Buren, Calhoun, Allegan, Oakland,Kent, Barry, St. Clair, Ingham, andSanilac counties, although extensivetracts are rare. Most of the land insouthern Michigan that once supportedthis forest type has been converted to

agriculture—about 1.3 million frag-mented acres remain. Farm woodlotsare the major refuge for this type,although most have been heavily cutover. Because of the amazing vitalityand reproductive power of the plantsthat make up these forests, thosespared the ax or saw for a long periodusually recover to a conditionapproaching what they were in pre-European settlement times, althoughsome species may be lost.

Key viewing areas

• Stony Creek Metropark (MacombCounty northeast of Rochester).

• Indian Springs Metropark (OaklandCounty northwest of Pontiac).

• Nan Weston Nature Preserve atSharon Hollow, Michigan Nature


Southern MesicDeciduous (Maple-

Beech) Forests

Jack-in-the-pulpit above wild ginger.


62

Habitat

The hardwood forest communityemblematic of much of southernMichigan, these forests occupy well-drained, moderately fertile habitats.They occupy mostly glacial ice-contactfeatures—end moraines, kames, eskers,and till plains—so topography frequent-ly is hilly or rolling. But these forestsalso can occur on flat, sandy lakeplains. Near Lake Michigan they alsogrow in sand dunes. Soils are typicallycoarse-textured—mostly slightly acid

sandy loams. Prior to European settle-ment, much of the land now in this for-est type probably was oak openings—savanna communities maintained byannual fires set by native people. Someof this land was converted to agricultureby white settlers, and the most fertileland still is farmed. Other areas suc-ceeded to closed forests when the firesceased to burn or agriculture was aban-doned. Surface fires can occur in thiscommunity, but wind and ice stormsare the most common naturaldisturbances.

Southern Dry-Mesic Deciduous (Oak-Mixed Hardwood) Forests W7

63

Signature trees

This is typically an oak-dominatedforest type, with one or more of the fol-lowing species always present:

• Black oak• White oak• Red oak

Other trees

Associated tree species may bepresent in small numbers or they mayoutnumber the oaks, especially if astand has been selectively logged:

• Shagbark hickory• Pignut hickory• Sassafras• Black cherry• Red maple• Bur oak• White ash• Basswood• Black walnut• Bigtooth aspen• White pine (near Lake Michigan

and in the Region I-II transitionzone)

Associated plants

On very moist and rich dry-mesichabitats, a high understory diversityusually develops, including many of thespecies found in mesic hardwoodforests (Type 6).

Poison ivy.

Blue beech (musclewood).

Southern Dry-Mesic Oak Forests

66

Foresters have long considered themanagement of oak forests problematicbecause oaks reproduce with difficulty.Acorns are eaten by many animals andbirds, so little seed survives to germi-nate. Oaks do not thrive in shade andgrow more slowly than competingspecies. Therefore, selective cutting ofoaks discriminates against them and isnot recommended. Small patchclearcuts or shelterwood harvests (i.e.,removing about half of the overstory

trees), along with plenty of soil distur-bance and suppression of competingspecies with herbicides, seem to workbest. Prescribed burning in regeneratingstands also may be effective in sup-pressing oak competitors, which do notsprout back as vigorously as oaks aftertheir tops are killed by a fire. But expe-rience with this technique is limited.Thinning established stands to invigor-ate large mast-producing oaks and otherspecies is a common practice.

Wild geranium.

Spring beauty.


84

Habitat

Same as that of Type 10, dry-mesicoak forests. Northern dry-mesic habi-tats once supported the magnificentold-growth white and red pine foreststhat made Michigan famous in the 19thcentury. This present-day type repre-sents a second-growth reincarnation ofthe “cathedral pines” in areas wherepostlogging wildfires were not severe orrepeated. In some places, however, the

pine did not come back, nor did anyother forest (see Type 23). Many peoplefondly associate these fragrant andstately forests with the north woods,and rightly so — they are a signaturenorthern forest community. Both low-intensity surface and stand-replacingfires once occurred with regularity inthis type, but they are infrequent todaybecause of fire prevention and suppres-sion measures.

Northern Dry-Mesic Pine Forests W11

85

Signature trees

The same species that occur in Type 10 also constitute this type, butnow two pines dominate in variablemixtures:

• Red (Norway) pine• White pine

Red pine is more common on drysandy soils, whereas white pine willpredominate on more mesic habitats.

Other trees

Numerous hardwood and conifertrees can be associated with the bigpines:

• White oak (rare in Region III andabsent in Region IV)

• Black oak (region I and the south-western part of Region II only)

• Northern pin oak (localized inregions III and IV)

• Red oak• Red maple• Black cherry• Bigtooth aspen• Quaking aspen• Paper birch• Jack pine• Hemlock• Balsam fir (usually subcanopy,

near wetlands)• White spruce (usually subcanopy

in regions III and IV)Striped maple.

Bracken fern.

Northern Dry-Mesic Pine Forests

111

Open forests of scattered orclumped trees—known as

savannas or barrens—represent atransition between closed forests andprairies. They are maintained by fre-quent disturbances, usually fire orgrazing. Trees are the dominantstructural feature, but their low den-sity and dispersion allow manyplants typical of prairies and mead-ows to occupy the large gaps in theoverstory. Forest understory speciesare more common in shaded areas.Although they occupied more than 2million acres in the early 1800s,savannas are the rarest forest com-munities in Michigan today. In fact,the bucolic upland “oak openings”described by early settlers and byJames Fenimore Cooper in his storyof the same name have disappeared,as have the prairie chickens thatoccupied them. Because manysavannas—particularly oak open-

ings—occupied fertile mesic habi-tats, they were long ago cleared foragriculture. Many wet-mesic savannahabitats were drained or grew intoclosed forests. Urban developmentalso claimed much of the area onceoccupied by open forests. Savannacommunities in xeric habitatsunsuitable for farming grew intoclosed forests when fire was exclud-ed or when farmland was aban-doned. Today state, federal, and pri-vate agencies are actively working topreserve or restore examples ofthese fascinating communities.

Open communities also can bethe product of harsh habitat condi-tions (e.g., rock outcroppings) orhuman disturbances. Although thesecommunities also are relatively rare,their total area in the state hasremained fairly stable or slowlydeclined since Euro-Americansettlement.




W

L

R

Part III.Open-Canopy Upland Forest

Communities

112

Habitat

Where present, this community typeoccupies poorly drained clay soils orsandy soils underlain by clay in theplain formed by meltwaters from theWisconsin glacier. This flat or gentlyundulating plain extends inland up to30 or 40 miles from the shores of lakesErie and St. Clair and Saginaw Bay.Some of these lowland habitats areinundated in the spring, but during adry summer they can become droughty.

Sandy former stream channels anddunes are interspersed throughout thelake plains; on some of these dry-mesicor xeric habitats, dry oak forests (Type8) are found in association with thepresent type. Historically, these savan-nas occurred in a mosaic with sandyoak flatwoods, hardwood swamps, andwet or mesic prairies. The greaterDetroit area and shoreline develop-ments now occupy much of the south-ernmost part of this habitat.

Southern Lake-plain Oak-Hardwood Openings R17

113

Signature trees

• Bur oak• Pin oak• Swamp white oak• Eastern cottonwood

Other common trees

• Red maple• Silver maple• Green ash• Quaking aspen• Black cherry• Shagbark hickory

Associated plants

Shrubs mostly are characteristic ofmoist habitats:

• American hazelnut• Shining sumac• Chokeberry• Buttonbush• Red-osier dogwood• Pale dogwood• Michigan holly• Autumn olive*• Blueleaf willow• Heartleaf willow

Many former openings have grown into closed oak forests.

Southern Lakepla in Openings

115

• Big bluestem grass• Little bluestem grass • Indian grass• Blue-joint grass• Switchgrass• Rush• Twig rush• Sedges


Lake-plain oak openings are con-fined to Region I—the Great Lakesshorelines in Monroe, Wayne, St. Clair,Huron, Tuscola, and Bay counties.Although this type and its associatedsand barrens occupied more than75,000 acres in the early 1800s, its cur-rent area is no more than a few hun-dred acres. The rare occurrence,

degraded condition, and uncertain sta-tus of oak openings demand protectionof existing tracts and creation of newareas.

Key viewing areas

• Algonac State Park (St. Clair County;mouth of the St. Clair River east ofPontiac)—degraded oak openings withsome restoration in progress.

• Petersburg State Game Area (MonroeCounty southwest of Dundee).

Uses and management

These unique communities providea glimpse of what a good part of pre-settlement Detroit was like. That alone


Southern Lake-plainOak-Hardwood

Openings

Tall coreopsis.

Southern Lakepla in Openings

117

Habitat

This savanna community occupiesthe most drought-prone habitats in thesouthern part of the state—level or gen-tly rolling, excessively well-drained gla-cial outwash or ice-contact landforms.Soils are sandy, infertile, acid in pH,and low in organic matter. Historically,oak barrens tended to occur in bandssurrounding areas of prairie. They were

maintained by regular fires set acciden-tally or intentionally by native people.Lightning fires also occurred. WhenEuro-American settlers came on thescene, these fires began to wane. Manyacres that once were this type havebeen lost to human developments orhave succeeded to dry oak forests (Type8) because of the exclusion of regularfires. Farming these harsh habitatsnever was a viable option.

Southern Oak Barrens R18

118

Signature trees

Two oaks dominate this type, withfew associated species attaining theirstature:

• Black oak• White oak

Other trees

• Northern pin oak • Red maple• Black cherry• Quaking aspen• Bigtooth aspen• Sassafras

• Pignut hickory• White pine• Eastern red cedar• Jack pine (very local)

Associated plants

The small tree and shrub layer maybe almost totally absent in some placesor dense and thicket-like in others:

• Serviceberries• Choke cherry• Wild plum• Hawthorns• Pasture rose• Shining sumac• American hazelnut• Beaked hazelnut• Dwarf chestnut oak• Low sweet blueberry• Sweetfern• Sand cherry• Prairie willow• Bearberry• Huckleberry• New Jersey tea• Common juniper

In these dry prairie habitats, theherb layer is profuse and distinctive,with grasses always an important com-ponent:

• Northern dewberry• Birdfoot violet• Sky-blue aster• Tall sunflower• Dwarf dandelion

Choke cherry

OPEN-CANOPY UPLAND FOREST COMMUNITIES

119

• Pearly everlasting• Blazing star• False foxglove• Prairie hawkweed• Common St. John’s wort*• Tickseed• Flowering spurge• White pea• Wild lupine• Hairy lespedeza• Wild bergamot• Wood betony• Common ragweed

• Spotted knapweed*• Prickly pear cactus • Pennsylvania sedge• Nut grass• Little bluestem grass• Big bluestem grass• Panic grass• Poverty grass• June grass• Needle grass• Hair grass• Reindeer moss lichen

* Exotic (non-native)

Northern dewberry (red leaves).

Southern Oak Barrens

120


Once occupying over 700,000 acresin Region I, this community has shrunkto a few hundred acres, principally inAllegan County. Hundreds of additionalacres are in restorable condition inCass, Branch, Livingston, Jackson,Washtenaw, and Van Buren counties.Maintenance of existing barrens andrestoration of those that have becomedegraded should be a priority for theDepartment of Natural Resources andprivate nature organizations.


Southern OakBarrens

Prescribed burning is needed to create or maintain barrens.


122

Habitat

These diverse communities some-times are separated into pine and oak-pine barrens, but in reality they sharemany characteristics, occur in similarhabitats, occupy comparable geographicareas, and often intergrade. They typi-cally occur on flat or gently rolling out-wash plains, lake plains, and sanddunes. Soils in these xeric or dry-mesichabitats are sandy, acid in pH, relativelyinfertile, and seasonally droughty.

Barrens are the open savanna analog ofdry-mesic oak (Type 10) and dry north-ern jack pine (Type 12) forests. Theunique plant community of these bar-rens—in essence treed prairies—ismaintained by frequent fires or by frostin depressions where cold air drains.The exact composition and structure ofthese communities vary by habitat con-ditions, past history, and geographyfrom south to north and east to west.Some barrens once dominated by pine

Northern Pine and Oak Barrens R19

123

are now oak dominated because of theintense and repeated wildfires of thelate 19th and early 20th centuries.Trees in barrens can be large and wide-ly spaced, creating a park-like look, orcrowded and stunted in scattered thick-ets. Fire scars at the bases of treetrunks are common.

Signature trees

One conifer dominates many ofthese barrens (least of all in Lake andNewaygo counties), usually as bushy,open-grown trees or as spindly trees indense thickets:

• Jack pine

Several oak species occur as largetrees or as clumps of basal sprouts:

• White oak• Northern pin oak• Black oak (southwestern part of

Region II)

Two other conifers are important,not so much because of their number astheir large size:

• Red pine• White pine (principally Lake and

Newaygo counties)

Red pine was important historicallyin many northern barrens, occurringmostly as large “superdominant” treesthat survived frequent fires, but it isless well represented today.

Other trees

Minor tree associates—the hard-woods often occur as sprouts—include:

• Red oak• Red oak hybrids • Bur oak• Red maple• Black cherry• Quaking aspen• Bigtooth aspen• Sassafras (southwestern part of

Region II)

Sand cherry.

Northern Pine and Oak Barrens

124

Associated plants

The small tree and shrub layer iskept low and clumped by frequent fires:

• Serviceberries• Pin cherry• Allegheny plum• American hazelnut• Beaked hazelnut• Low sweet blueberry• Sweetfern• Sand cherry• Prairie willow• Bearberry• Huckleberry• New Jersey tea• Northern dewberry

In these dry prairie habitats, theherb layer is profuse and distinctive,with grass always an importantcomponent:

• Wintergreen• Birdfoot violet• Sky-blue aster• Blazing star• Prairie cinquefoil• Hoary puccoon• Prairie ragwort• Divaricate sunflower• Hill’s thistle• Canada hawkweed• Gray goldenrod• Showy goldenrod• Tickseed

Hoary puccoon.


128

Habitat

The shores of the Great Lakes con-tain many unique habitats. This com-munity type is one of them. Occurringin wide, sandy depressions betweendunes, these barrens appear almostdesert-like. They can be associated withinterdunal wetlands, however, and may,in fact, sometimes be former wetlandsthat have filled with windblown sand.The neutral sandy soils in these formerembayments are typically xeric, butduring periods of high lake levels, water

tables may be at or close to the surface.The major disturbances are shiftingdunes and human encroachments.

Signature trees

Several conifers and hardwoodsoccupy these barrens:

• White pine• Red pine• Jack pine• Northern white cedar• Paper birch• Balsam poplar

Great Lakes Barrens R20

129

Associated plants

One or more of these low shrubsmay be prominent:

• Common juniper • Creeping juniper• Buffalo berry• Velvetleaf blueberry

The ground layer is typically sparseand may consist of:

• Bearberry• Beach heath• Poison ivy• Cudweed• Butterfly weed• False Solomon seal

• Hairy puccoon• Beach grass• Dune grass • Fescue• Poverty grass• June grass• Nut grass


These communities are very locallydistributed along the shorelines of lakesHuron, Michigan, and Superior. Outsidethe protection of parks and reserves,their status is tenuous. Unregulatedshoreline development and rampagingdune vehicles are constant threats.

Trees in barrens, like these red pines, often grow in clumps.

Great Lake Barrens

132

• Sturgeon Bay, Wilderness State Park(Emmet County west of MackinawCity).

• McCauley’s Point Preserve (southerntip of Donnegal Bay on the west shoreof Beaver Island).

Uses and management

These fragile communities, whichprovide habitat for dune animals, are tobe seen and enjoyed with properrespect. They have no economic useaside from human recreation. The onlymanagement necessary is protectionfrom trampling, development, and dunevehicles.

Buffalo berry.


133

Habitat

Simply put, these are forests grow-ing on rocks. Balds and glades occur onthe thin, sandy soils of exposed igneousor metamorphic bedrock ridgelines andescarpments, which are not common inMichigan. On south-facing exposures,especially, the summer environment isvery hot and dry. Cliffs—mostly consist-ing of limestone or sandstone bedrock—occur along the shores of the Great

Lakes. Nowhere are these communitiesextensive. The forests that grow inthese stressful habitats usually areopen. Trees are stunted and bonsai-like,and some of them may be many hun-dreds of years old. The Germans callthem krummholz (literally “twistedwood”). Often tree crowns on exposedridgelines are shaped by the prevailingwind into a flag shape, with few branch-es protruding on the upwind side andmost branches extending downwind.

Northern Balds, Cliffs, and Bedrock Glades R21

134

Signature trees

A few trees are found on these rockyhabitats:

• White pine• Red pine• Jack pine• Northern white cedar• Red oak• Paper birch

Associated plants

Shrubs may include:

• Common juniper• Creeping juniper• Low-bush blueberry

• Nine bark• Bush honeysuckle

Herbs:

• Bearberry• Fireweed• Three-toothed cinquefoil• Bluebell• Showy goldenrod• Gillman’s goldenrod• Fescue • Trisetum grass• Poverty grass• Tickle grass• Hair grass• Canada bluegrass*

* Exotic (non-native)Trees, like these red pines, often are twistedand stunted.

Rocks are harsh habitats.


135


Forested balds and bedrock gladesare rare because the habitats that sup-port them occur in only a few places inMichigan. They are found exclusively inthe ancient highlands of the westernUpper Peninsula (Region IV). Cliffs alsoare rare, occurring in just a few placesalong lakes Michigan and Superior inthe Upper Peninsula. Rock forests gen-erally are well protected in parks andreserves or by their inaccessibility.

Key viewing areas

• Fayette State Park (Garden Peninsulasouthwest of Manistique in DeltaCounty).

• Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore(Alger County northwest of Munising).

Showy goldenrod.

Bluebell.


Northern Balds,Cliffs, and Bedrock

Glades

Balds , Cl i f f s , and Glades

137

Habitat

Alvars consist of flat, calcareous(limestone and dolomite) bedrock pave-ments lying close to the shores of theGreat Lakes. They are harsh habitats,typically quite wet in the spring butexcessively dry by late summer. Thisyin and yang of moisture is central toalvar ecology. The thin alkaline soils aredeepest and bedrock is less exposedaway from the direct wave and iceaction of the lakes. Disjunct prairiecommunities tend to occur where

bedrock lies at the surface and soils arethinnest (Catling and Brownell 1999).Plants tend to grow in fissures in thefractured rock, sometimes creatingstriking linear assemblages. Opensavannas or patches of trees up to sev-eral acres in size intermingle with theprairies. Where soils are well developed,closed cedar-dominated boreal forestsgrow. Late-season fires were once a fac-tor in these habitats, but today fire pre-vention and suppression have excludedthis ecological process.

Alvar Savannas R22

138

Signature trees

The scattered or clumped alvarsavanna is quite distinct, with tree com-position at any place depending princi-pally on moisture availability:

• White spruce• Red pine• White pine• Balsam fir • Northern white cedar• Quaking aspen• Balsam poplar• Tamarack (wettest areas)

Other trees

• Jack pine• Paper birch• Black ash (wettest areas)

Associated plants

Shrubs are common and may occursingly or in patches:

• Common juniper• Creeping juniper• Shrubby cinquefoil• Fragrant sumac• Choke cherry• Buffalo berry• Sand cherry

Stunted quaking aspens.


139

The ground flora is unique becauseit includes several state threatenedplants, principally disjunct prairie andboreal species:

• Bearberry• Lance-leaved coreopsis• Northern ragwort• Upland white goldenrod• Ox-eye daisy*• Large-leaved aster• Hill’s thistle• Yarrow• Spotted knapweed*• Bluebell• Bluets• Indian paintbrush• False pennyroyal • Early buttercup• Red anemone• Blazing star• Avens

Prairie smoke.

Bromegrass.

Alvar Savannas

Harold E. Malde

148

nlike plants, which are perma-nently rooted in the soil, animalsmove from place to place. Large,

wide-ranging birds and mammals mayroam about a territory that encompass-es square miles and several communitytypes in search of their requirementsfor food, water, cover, and breeding.The territory of small animals is moreconfined, usually encompassing just oneor two communities. During the seasonwhen they are travelling between winterand summer habitats, migrating birdsand mammals can be spotted just aboutanywhere. Additionally, some animalsare cosmopolitan in their habitat prefer-ences—their requirements may be metin various ways. A black-capped chick-adee or a white-tailed deer could proba-bly be found in any community

described in this book. Certain otheranimals are very picky about their habi-tat and, unless migrating, can usually befound only in it. It is fruitless, for exam-ple, to look for Kirtland’s warblers inanything but a young jack pine forest orriver otters in uplands far away from astream bank or wetland.

Because of their mobility and oftenambiguous habitat preferences, I didnot attempt to identify the animalsmost likely to be observed in each ofthe state’s 23 forest community types.Interested bird and animal watcherscan consult Baker (1983), Benyus(1989), Brewer (1991), and the MIWILD (Michigan Wildlife Habitats) CDdeveloped by the Michigan Departmentof Natural Resources for more informa-tion on animal habitats.

BIRDS AND MAMMALS ASSOCIATEDWITH FOREST COMMUNITIES

UGray wolf.

© Rick Baetsen

149

Trees and Shrubs:

Barnes, B.V., and W.H. Wagner, Jr. 2004.Michigan Trees, Revised andUpdated. Ann Arbor: University ofMichigan Press.

Billington, C. 1977. Shrubs ofMichigan. Bulletin 20. BloomfieldHills, Mich.: Cranbrook Institute ofScience.

Little, E.L. 1980. The Audubon SocietyField Guide to North AmericanTrees: Eastern Region. New York:Alfred A. Knopf.

Neal, J. 1995. Identifying Trees ofMichigan. Extension Bulletin E-2332. East Lansing: Michigan StateUniversity.

Petrides, G.A. 1998. A Field Guide toTrees and Shrubs: Northeastern andNorth-Central United States andSoutheastern and South-CentralCanada. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Tekiela, S. 2002. Trees of MichiganField Guide. Cambridge, Minn.:Adventure Publications.

Wildflowers and Herbs:

Case, F.W., Jr. 1987. Orchids of theWestern Great Lakes Region(revised). Bulletin 48. BloomfieldHills, Mich.: Cranbrook Institute ofScience.

Cobb, B. 1999. A Field Guide to theFerns and Their Related Families.Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

McKenny, M., and R.T. Peterson. 1998.A Field Guide to Wildflowers:Northeastern and North-CentralNorth America. Boston: HoughtonMifflin.

Tekiela, S. 2000. Wildflowers ofMichigan Field Guide. Cambridge,Minn.: Adventure Publications.

Thierer, J.W., W.A. Niering, and N.C.Olmstead. 2001. The NationalAudubon Society Field Guide toNorth American Wildflowers:Eastern Region. New York: Alfred A.Knopf.

Animals:

Harding, J.H., and J.A. Holman.1992.Michigan Frogs, Toads, andSalamanders. Extension Bulletin E-2350. East Lansing: Michigan StateUniversity.

Harding, J.H., and J.A. Holman.1990.Michigan Turtles and Lizards.Extension Bulletin E-2234. EastLansing: Michigan State University.

Holman, J.A., J.H. Harding, M.M.Hensley, and G.R. Dudderar. 1989.Michigan Snakes. Extension BulletinE-2000. East Lansing: Michigan StateUniversity.

FIELD GUIDES TO SPECIES IDENTIFICATION*

150

Whitaker, J.O., Jr. 1996. The NationalAudubon Society Field Guide toNorth American Mammals. NewYork: Alfred A. Knopf.

Birds:

Peterson, R.T., and V.M. Peterson. 2002.A Field Guide to Birds of Easternand Central North America. Boston:Houghton Mifflin.

Sibley, D.A. 2003. The Sibley FieldGuide to Birds of Eastern NorthAmerica. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.

Black, T. and G. Kennedy. 2003. Birdsof Michigan. Auburn, WA: Lone PinePublishing.

Insects:

Milne, L., and M. Milne. 1980. TheNational Audubon Society FieldGuide to North American Insectsand Spiders. New York: Alfred A.Knopf.

Nielsen, M.C. 1999. MichiganButterflies and Skippers. ExtensionBulletin E-2675. East Lansing:Michigan State University.

Bland, R. 2003. The Orthoptera ofMichigan – Grasshoppers, Katydidsand Crickets – Biology andDescriptions. Extension Bulletin E-2815. East Lansing: Michigan StateUniversity.

FIELD GUIDES TO SPECIES IDENTIFICATION*

* There are many excellent field guides available, each with a unique approachto the subject. I have selected a few of my favorites and those widely availableon bookstore shelves.

Ninebark and pollinating friend.

151

Albert, D.A. 1995. Regional LandscapeEcosystems of Michigan, Minnesota,and Wisconsin: A Working Map andClassification. General TechnicalReport NC-178. St. Paul, Minn.:USDA Forest Service.

Albert, D.A., and P.J. Comer. 1999.Natural Community Abstract forWooded Dune and Swale Complex.Lansing: Michigan Natural FeaturesInventory(www.msue.msu.edu/mnfi/abstracts/).

Albert, D.A. 2003. Between Land andLake: Michigan’s Great LakesCoastal Wetlands. Extension BulletinE-2902. Lansing: Michigan NaturalFeatures Inventory, Michigan StateUniversity Extension.

Baker, R.H. 1983. Michigan Mammals.East Lansing: Michigan StateUniversity Press.

Barnes, B.U. and W.H. Wagner, Jr. 1981.Michigan Trees. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press.

Barnes, B.V., D.R. Zak, S.R. Denton, andS.H. Spurr. 1998. Forest Ecology (4thed.). New York: John Wiley and Sons.

Barrett, L.R. 1998. Origin and history ofstump prairies in northern Michigan:forest composition and logging prac-tices. Great Lakes Geographer5: 105-123.

Benyus, J.M. 1989. The Field Guide toWildlife Habitats of the EasternUnited States. New York: Simon &Schuster.

Billington, C. 1952. Ferns of Michigan.Bulletin 32. Bloomfield Hills, Mich.:Cranbrook Institute of Science.

Brewer, R. 1991. Biogeography andecology. Pages 59-85 in R. Brewer,G.A. McPeek, and R.J. Adams, Jr.(eds.), The Atlas of Breeding Birds ofMichigan. East Lansing: MichiganState University Press.

Burger, T.L. and J. Kotar. 2003. A Guideto Forest Communities and HabitatTypes of Michigan. Madison: Depart-ment of Forest Ecology and Manage-ment, University of Wisconsin.

Catling, P.M., and V.R. Brownell. 1999.Alvars of the Great Lakes Region.Pages 375-391 in R.C. Anderson, J.S.Fralish, and J.M. Baskin (eds.),Savannas, Barrens, and RockOutcrop Communities of NorthAmerica. New York: CambridgeUniversity Press.

Chadde, S.W. 1998. Great LakesWetland Flora. Calumet, Mich.:Pocketflora Press.

ADDITIONAL REFERENCES

152

Cleland, D.T., J.B. Hart, G.E. Host, K.S.Pregitzer, and C.W. Ramm. 1993.Field Guide: Ecological Classifica-tion and Inventory System of theHuron-Manistee National Forests.Cadillac, Mich.: USDA Forest Service,Huron-Manistee National Forest.

Curtis, J.T. 1959. The Vegetation ofWisconsin. Madison: University ofWisconsin Press.

Dickmann, D.I., and L.A. Leefers. 2003.The Forests of Michigan. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press.

Faber-Langendoen, D. (ed.). 2001. PlantCommunities of the Midwest:Classification in an EcologicalContext. Arlington, Va.: Associationfor Biodiversity Information(www.abi.org/publications/midwest/).

Hoffman, R. 2002. Wisconsin’s NaturalCommunities. Madison: University ofWisconsin Press.

Kapp, R.O. 1999. Michigan latePleistocene, Holocene, and presettle-ment vegetation and climate. Pages31-58 in J.R. Halsey (ed.), RetrievingMichigan’s Past: The Archaeology ofthe Great Lakes State. Bulletin 64.Bloomfield Hills, Mich.: CranbrookInstitute of Science.

Kircher, J.C. 1998. A Field Guide toEastern Forests. Boston: HoughtonMifflin.

Leatherberry, E.C., and J.S. Spencer, Jr.1996. Michigan Forest Statistics,1993. Resource Bulletin NC-170.St.Paul, Minn.: USDA Forest Service.

McPeek, M.T. 1991. Land, climate, andvegetation of Michigan. Pages 15-31in R. Brewer, G.A. McPeek, and R.J.Adams, Jr. (eds.), The Atlas ofBreeding Birds of Michigan. EastLansing: Michigan State UniversityPress.

Smith, N.F. 1995. Trees of Michiganand the Upper Great Lakes. Lansing:Thunder Bay Press.

Sommers, L.M. (ed.). 1977. Atlas ofMichigan. East Lansing: MichiganState University Press.

Voss, E.G. 1972. Michigan Flora. Part I:Gymnosperms and Monocots.Bulletin 55. Bloomfield Hills, Mich.:Cranbrook Institute of Science.

Voss, E.G. 1985. Michigan Flora. PartII: Dicots (Saururaceae-Cornaceae).Bulletin 59. Bloomfield Hills, Mich.:Cranbrook Institute of Science.

Voss, E.G. 1996. Michigan Flora. PartIII: Dicots (Pyrolaceae-Compositae).Bulletin 61. Bloomfield Hills, Mich.:Cranbrook Institute of Science.

Wells, J.R., F.W. Case, Jr., and T.L.Mellichamp. 1999. Wildflowers of theWestern Great Lakes Region.Bulletin 63. Bloomfield Hills, Mich.:Cranbrook Institute of Science.

ADDITIONAL REFERENCES

153

Agrimony...................Agrimonia spp.

Alder, green...............Alnus crispa

Anise root..................Osmorhiza longistylis

Aster, arrow-leaved ...Aster sagittifolius

Aster, large-leaved.....Aster macrophyllus

Aster, New England ...Aster novae-angliae

Aster, panicled ..........Aster lanceolatus

Aster, sky-blue ..........Aster oolentangiensis

Aster, swamp.............Aster puniceus

Autumn olive.............Elaeagnus umbellata

Avens.........................Geum spp.

Baneberry, red ..........Actaea rubra

Baneberry, white.......Actaea pachypoda

Beach heath ..............Hudsonia tomentosa

Bearberry ..................Arctostaphylos uva-ursi

Bedstraw....................Galium spp.

Bedstraw, sweet-scented .........Galium triflorum

Beech drops ..............Epifagus virginiana

Beggars tick...............Bidens spp.

Bellflower, marsh ......Campanula aparinoides

Bellwort .....................Uvularia grandiflora

Bergamot, wild ..........Monarda fistulosa

Betony, swamp..........Pedicularius lanceolata

Betony, wood(lousewort) .............Pedicularis canadensis

Black chokeberry ......Aronia prunifolia

Black snakeroot ........Sanicula spp.

Blackberry, common..Rubus allegheniensis

Black-eyed Susan ......Rudbeckia hirta

Blazing star ...............Liatris spp.

Blue cohosh...............Caulophyllum

thalictroides

Blue phlox .................Phlox divaricata

Bluebell .....................Campanula rotundifolia

Blueberries ................Vaccinium spp.

Blueberry,highbush.................Vaccinium, corymbosum

Blueberry,low sweet ................Vaccinium angustifolium

Blueberry,

velvetleaf ................Vaccinium myrtilloides

Bluets ........................Houstonia spp.

Bog laurel ..................Kalmia polifolia

Bog rosemary ............Andromeda glaucophylla

Boneset......................Eupatorium perfoliatum

Buckthorn, alder-leaved ............Rhamnus alnifolia

Buckthorn,common..................Rhamnus cathartica

Buckthorn, glossy......Rhamnus frangula

Buffalo berry .............Shepherdia canadensis

Bunchberry ...............Cornus canadensis

Buttercup, early ........Ranunculus fascicularis

Butterfly weed...........Asclepias tuberosa

Buttonbush................Cephalanthus

occidentalis

Calla, wild .................Calla palustris

Canadian yew............Taxus canadensis

Cattail........................Typha latifolia

Chokeberry ...............Aronia prunifolia

Cinquefoil, prairie.....Potentilla arguta

Cinquefoil,

shrubby ..................Potentilla fruticosa

Cinquefoil,

three-toothed..........Potentilla tridentata

Clearweed .................Pilea spp.

Club mosses ..............Lycopodium spp.

Columbine.................Aquilegia canadensis

L ATIN NAMES OF SHRUBS, GROUND FLOR A, AND EXOTIC TREES*

154

Coreopsis,

lance-leaved............Coreopsis lanceolata

Coreopsis, tall ...........Coreopsis tripteris

Cow wheat.................Melampyrum lineare

Cowslip, Virginia .......Mertensia virginica

Cranberry,

high-bush................Viburnum opulus

Cranberry, large ........Vaccinium

macrocarpon

Cranberry, small .......Vaccinium oxycoccos

Creeping

snowberry...............Gaultheria hispidula

Cudweed ...................Gnaphalium spp.

Currant,

swamp black...........Ribes lacustre

Currant, swamp red ..Ribes triste

Currant, wild black ...Ribes americanum

Cut-leaved

toothwort................Dentaria laciniata

Dogwood, gray...........Cornus foemina

Dogwood, pale ...........Cornus amomum

Dogwood,red-osier ....Cornus stolonifera

Dropseed, prairie ......Sporobolus heterolepis

Dutchman’s

breeches .................Dicentra cucullaria

Dwarf dandelion........Krigia spp.

Elderberry,

common..................Sambucus canadensis

Elderberry, red..........Sambucus racemosa

Enchanter’s

nightshade ..............Circaea lutetiana

Enchanter’s

nightshade, small ...Circaea alpina

Fern, bracken............Pteridium aquilinum

Fern, brittle...............Cystopteris fragilis

Fern, Christmas ........Polystichum

acrostichoides

Fern, cinnamon.........Osmunda cinnamomea

Fern,

evergreen wood ......Dryopteris marginalis

Fern, lady ..................Athyrium filix-femina

Fern, maidenhair

spleenwort ..............Asplenium trichomanes

Fern, maidenhair ......Adiantum pedatum

Fern, marsh

shield ......................Dryopteris thelypteris

Fern, rattlesnake.......Botrychium

virginianum

Fern, royal.................Osmunda regalis

Fern, sensitive...........Onoclea sensibilis

Fern, shield ...............Dryopteris spp.

Fern, spinulosewood .......................Dryopteris spinulosa

Fescue .......................Festuca saximontana

Fireweed....................Epilobium angustifolium

Fleabane, common....Erigeron philadelphicus

Flowering spurge .......Euphorbia corollata

Foamflower ...............Tiarella cordifolia

Foxglove, false...........Aureolaria spp.

Garlic mustard ..........Alliaria petiolata

Geranium, wild .........Geranium maculatum

Ginger, wild ...............Asarum canadense

Goldenrod,

bluestem.................Solidago caesia

Goldenrod,

Gillman’s.................Solidago simplex

Goldenrod, gray ........Solidago nemoralis

Goldenrod, Ohio .......Solidago ohioensis

Goldenrod,

Riddel’s ...................Solidago riddellii

Goldenrod,

rough-leaved ...........Solidago patula

Goldenrod, showy .....Solidago speciosa

Goldenrod,

upland white...........Solidago ptarmicoides

Goldthread ................Coptis trifolia

LATIN NAMES OF SHRUBS, GROUND FLORA, AND EXOTIC TREES

157

Orchid, showy

lady slipper .............Cypripedium reginae

Orchid, tall

northern bog...........Habenaria hyperborea

Orchid, tall

white bog ................Habenaria dilatata

Orchid,

white-fringed ..........Habenaria

blephariglottis

Orchid, yellow

lady slipper .............Cypripedium calceolus

Ox-eye daisy .............Chrysanthemum

leucanthemum

Partridge berry ..........Mitchella repens

Pasture rose ..............Rosa carolina

Pearly everlasting......Anaphalis

margaritacea

Pennyroyal, false.......Trichostema

brachiatum

Pine, Austrian ...........Pinus nigra

Pine, Scotch ..............Pinus sylvestris

Pipsissewa .................Chimaphila umbellata

Pitcher plant .............Sarracenia purpurea

Poison ivy..................Toxicodendron

radicans

Poison sumac ............Toxicodendron vernix

Pokeweed ..................Phytolacca americana

Poplars, hybrid..........Populus spp.

Prairie smoke ............Geum triflorum

Prickly pear

cactus .....................Opuntia humifusa

Puccoon, hairy ..........Lithospermum

canescens

Pussy toes..................Antennaria spp.

Queen Anne’s lace ....Daucus carota

Ragweed, common ....Ambrosia artemisiifolia

Ragweed, giant ..........Ambrosia trifida

Ragwort, golden.........Senecio aureus

Ragwort, northern.....Senecio pauperculus

Ragwort, prairie ........Senecio plattensis

Raisin, wild................Viburnum cassinoides

Raspberry, dwarf .......Rubus pubescens

Rattlesnake weed ......Hieracium venosum

Red anemone ............Anemone multifida

Reindeer

moss lichen ............Cladonia spp.

Rue anemone,

false ........................Isopyrum biternatum

Rush ..........................Juncus spp.

Rush, beak ................Rhynchospora spp.

Rush, spike................Eleocharis spp.

Rush, twig .................Cladium mariscoides

Sand cherry...............Prunus pumila

Sarsaparilla, wild.......Aralia nudicaulis

Saxifrage, early..........Saxifraga virginiensis

Sedge .........................Carex convoluta

Sedge,

Pennsylvania ..........Carex pensylvanica

Sedge, wide-leaved ....Carex albursina

Sedges .......................Carex spp.

Sheep sorrel ..............Rumex acetosella

Showy orchis.............Orchis spectabilis

Skullcap, mad-dog .....Scutellaria laterifolia

Skullcap, marsh ........Scutellaria galericulata

Skunk cabbage ..........Symplocarpus foetidus

Solomon seal .............Polygonatum biflorum

Solomon seal, false.....Smilacina stellata

Solomon seal,

hairy .......................Polygonatum pubescens

Sphagnum moss ........Sphagnum spp.

Spicebush..................Lindera benzoin

Spikenard, false.........Smilacina racemosa

Spotted knapweed.....Centaurea maculosa

Spotted touch-me-not

(jewelweed) ............Impatiens capensis


158

Spreading

dogbane ..................Apocynumandrosaemifolium

Spring beauty............Claytonia virginica

Spruce, blue ..............Picea pungens

Spruce, Norway.........Picea abies

Squawroot .................Conopholis americana

Squirrel corn.............Dicentra canadensis

St. John’s wort...........Hypericum perforatum

Starflower..................Trientalis borealis

Stickseed ...................Lappula squarrosa

Strawberry, wild........Fragaria virginiana

Sumac, fragrant.........Rhus aromatica

Sumac, shining..........Rhus copallina

Sundew......................Drosera spp.

Sunflower,

divaricate................Helianthus divaricatus

Sunflower, tall ...........Helianthus giganteus

Sunflower,

tickseed ..................Bidens coronatus

Sunflower, western ....Helianthus occidentalis

Sweet cicely ..............Osmorhiza claytonii

Sweetfern ..................Comptonia peregrina

Tall bellflower............Campanula americana

Thistle, Hill’s .............Cirsium hillii

Thistle, swamp..........Cirsium muticum

Tickseed ....................Coreopsis spp.

Trailing arbutus.........Epigaea repens

Trillium, common .....Trillium grandiflorum

Trillium, nodding ......Trillium cernuum

Twinflower.................Linnaea borealis

Viburnum,

maple-leaved ..........Viburnum acerifolium

Violet, birdfoot ..........Viola pedata

Violet, Canada

white.......................Viola canadensis

Violet, common

blue.........................Viola sororia

Violet, smooth

white.......................Viola macloskeyi

Violet, yellow.............Viola pubescens

Virginia creeper ........Parthenocissus

quinquefolia

Wapato (arrowhead) ..Sagittaria latifolia

Water hemlock ..........Cicuta spp.

Water horehound ......Lycopus spp.

White pea ..................Lathyrus ochroleucus

Willow, Bebb .............Salix bebbiana

Willow, blueleaf .........Salix myricoides

Willow, heartleaf .......Salix eriocephala

Willow, prairie...........Salix humilis

Willow, pussy ............Salix discolor

Willow, sandbar.........Salix exigua

Wintergreen ..............Gaultheria procumbens

Wood sage .................Teucrium canadense

Yarrow .......................Achillea millefolium

Yellow trout lily

(adder’s tongue)......Erythroniumamericanum


*The authorities for this compilation are Billington (1952) and Voss (1972, 1985, 1996).

Donald I. Dickmann (with pal Benny) is professor emeritus atMichigan State University, where he taught and conductedresearch in silviculture and ecology in the Department of

Forestry for 30 years. He holds a bachelor’s degree inforestry from the University of Washington and a doctorate inplant physiology from the University of Wisconsin. He is the

senior author of three previous books, includingThe Forests of Michigan (2003).


EXTENSION

Extension Bulletin E-3000

Produced by Communication and Technology ServicesMichigan State University

Documents

Michigan Forest Communities: A field guide and references Bulletins/Michigan... · Michigan Forest Communities A Field Guide and Reference Donald I. Dickmann ... Michigan forest community