Ozark-Ouachita Moist Hardwood Forest

EVT 7334Ozark-Ouachita Mesic Hardwood Forest
CES202.043GNRTreeHardwood
Summary
This system is found on lower slopes, toeslopes and valley bottoms within the Ozark and Ouachita regions, as well as on north slopes. In the Ozarks, Quercus rubra increases in abundance compared to dry-mesic habitats, and Acer saccharum is sometimes a leading dominant. On more alkaline moist soils, Quercus muehlenbergii, Tilia americana, and Cercis canadensis may be common. In the Boston Mountains, mesic forests may also be common on protected slopes and terraces next to streams. Here, Fagus grandifolia may be the leading dominant, with codominants of Acer saccharum, Liquidambar styraciflua, Tilia americana, Magnolia acuminata, Magnolia tripetala, and others. Similar habitats occur in the western Ouachita Mountains.
Source: NatureServe Explorer
Vegetation
Dominant or characteristic trees in examples of this system may include Quercus alba, Quercus rubra, Acer floridanum (= Acer barbatum), Acer saccharum, Fagus grandifolia, Liquidambar styraciflua, Quercus muehlenbergii, and Tilia americana. The understory may contain Cercis canadensis, Magnolia tripetala, and/or Magnolia acuminata. Some common shrubs include Asimina triloba and Lindera benzoin. Stands will typically have diverse ground layers. Some typical herbs include Podophyllum peltatum and Hybanthus concolor.
Source: NatureServe Explorer
Environment
This system may be found on a wide range of topographic positions. It includes mixed mesophytic forests, seeps/springs and smaller riparian areas. This system is found on primarily north- and east-facing aspects, lower slopes, toeslopes, small valley bottoms and terraces, as well as other protected slopes and ravines along intermittent and/or ephemeral streams. Distribution is influenced by local conditions affecting moisture, aspect, elevation and soil productivity. Closed conditions are multiple canopy usually late-seral forests. Stands of this system are generally small, isolated, and/or disjunct and are generally "embedded" in a larger landscape matrix. These communities are maintained primarily through naturally occurring circumstances such as aspect, elevation, soil moisture conditions, and soil productivity, except for mortality or other disturbance-induced openings or gaps.
Source: NatureServe Explorer
Dynamics
This type has a lower fire frequency than drier (uphill) types and experiences primarily low-intensity surface fire with occasional mosaic (mixed-severity) or replacement fire. Mean fire-return interval (MFI) is about 25 years with wide year-to-year and within-type variation related to moisture cycles, degree of sheltering and proximity to more fire-prone types. Anthropogenic fire is considered and contributes to within-type MFRI variation. Drought and moisture cycles play a strong role interacting with fire and insect and disease damage. Other natural disturbances may include wind and ice (Landfire 2007a).
Source: NatureServe Explorer
Threats
The most critical anthropogenic threat range-wide is invasive exotic species including Microstegium vimineum and Ailanthus altissima, which can become dominant in the ground and shrub layers following canopy disturbance. In more developed regions, Euonymus alatus, Euonymus fortunei, Ligustrum sinense, Lonicera japonica, and Lonicera maackii are taking over the understory at the landscape scale. For mesic hardwood forests containing Fraxinus species, emerald ash borer (which as of October 2013 has been reported from southeastern Missouri) may also be (or become) a significant stressor. Feral hogs also represent one of the greatest threats to biodiversity in these forests (Engeman et al. 2007). They can be especially difficult to control in sensitive slope forests. Conversion of this type has also resulted from repeated canopy removal through logging, which is a threat on private lands, but less so on public land, particularly in Arkansas, where many examples are known from national forests. Sites for this type were historically less frequently logged than the adjacent uplands, with more desirable species being removed in preference to Fagus grandifolia, which is less desirable in the lumber trade. In addition, some mesic hardwood forests in more moderately dissected terrain have been converted to pine plantations or impacted (destroyed or fragmented) by agriculture. Bluff habitats are often prime sites for development, especially along major rivers. The threat of development is exacerbated by the current surge in population in northwestern and north-central Arkansas. Urban and exurban sprawl into previously forested lands outside the major communities is expected to continue to increase (Arkansas Forestry Commission 2010). This will lead to the conversion of sites to human-created land uses.

The most significant potential climate change effects over the next 50 years include an increase in storms, which would contribute to erosion of the substrate and loss of canopy. Climate change may also bring increased periods of drought, which will affect the health and survival of the moisture-requiring trees, as well as increase the probability of damaging wildfire.
Source: NatureServe Explorer
Distribution
This system is found within the Ozarks and Ouachita Mountains of Missouri, Arkansas, and Oklahoma.
Source: NatureServe Explorer
Ecologically Associated Plant Species

Plant species that characterize this ecosystem type, organized by vegetation stratum. These are species ecologically associated with the ecosystem, not confirmed present in any specific area.

Tree canopy

Acer floridanum, Acer saccharum, Fagus grandifolia, Liquidambar styraciflua, Magnolia acuminata, Magnolia tripetala, Quercus alba, Quercus muehlenbergii, Quercus rubra, Tilia americana

Shrub/sapling (tall & short)

Cercis canadensis, Hamamelis vernalis, Lindera benzoin, Viburnum molle

Herb (field)

Cardamine angustata, Carex latebracteata, Delphinium newtonianum, Podophyllum peltatum, Tradescantia ozarkana
Source: NatureServe Ecological System assessment
Ecologically Associated Animals (2)

Animal species ecologically associated with this ecosystem type based on NatureServe assessment. These are species whose habitat requirements overlap with this ecosystem, not confirmed present in any specific roadless area.

Amphibians (2)

Common NameScientific NameG-Rank
Western Slimy SalamanderPlethodon albagulaG5
Ozark Zigzag SalamanderPlethodon angusticlaviusG4
Source: NatureServe Ecological System assessment
At-Risk Species Associated with this Ecosystem (4)

Species with conservation concern that are ecologically associated with this ecosystem type. G-Rank indicates global conservation status: G1 (critically imperiled) through G5 (secure). ESA status indicates U.S. Endangered Species Act listing.

Common NameScientific NameG-RankESA Status
Waterfall's SedgeCarex latebracteataG3--
Newton's LarkspurDelphinium newtonianumG3--
Ozark SpiderwortTradescantia ozarkanaG3--
Softleaf Arrow-woodViburnum molleG3--
Source: NatureServe Ecological System assessment
Component Associations (6)

Plant community associations that occur within this ecological system. Associations are the finest level of the U.S. National Vegetation Classification (USNVC) and describe specific, repeating assemblages of plant species. Each association represents a distinct community type that may be found where this ecosystem occurs.

NameG-Rank
Acer (floridanum, saccharum) - Juglans nigra - Fraxinus americana / Hybanthus concolor ForestG2 NatureServe
Acer (saccharum, floridanum) - Quercus rubra - Carya cordiformis / Asimina triloba ForestG3 NatureServe
Fagus grandifolia - Acer saccharum - Liriodendron tulipifera Unglaciated ForestG4 NatureServe
Fagus grandifolia - Quercus rubra - Tilia americana var. caroliniana / Magnolia tripetala / Podophyllum peltatum ForestG3 NatureServe
Quercus alba - Quercus rubra - Acer saccharum - Carya cordiformis / Lindera benzoin ForestG3 NatureServe
Quercus muehlenbergii - Acer saccharum Southeastern Oklahoma ForestG3 NatureServe
State Conservation Ranks (4)

Subnational conservation status ranks (S-ranks) assigned by Natural Heritage Programs in each state where this ecosystem occurs. S1 indicates critically imperiled at the state level, S2 imperiled, S3 vulnerable, S4 apparently secure, and S5 secure. An ecosystem may be globally secure but imperiled in specific states at the edge of its range.

StateS-Rank
ARSNR
MOSNR
OKSNR
TXSNR
Roadless Areas (7)

Inventoried Roadless Areas where this ecosystem is present, identified from LANDFIRE 2024 Existing Vegetation Type spatial analysis. Coverage indicates the proportion of each area occupied by this ecosystem type.

Arkansas (5)

AreaForestCoverageHectares
Brush HeapOuachita National Forest5.8%98.73
Dismal CreekOzark-St. Francis National Forest4.4%161.46
Gee CreekOzark-St. Francis National Forest3.0%98.1
Rich Mountain (AR)Ouachita National Forest2.7%28.44
Indian CreekOzark-St. Francis National Forest2.2%69.12

Oklahoma (2)

AreaForestCoverageHectares
Beech CreekOuachita National Forest4.1%136.17
Rich Mountain (OK)Ouachita National Forest3.2%64.26
Methodology and Data Sources

Ecosystem classification: Ecosystems are classified using the LANDFIRE 2024 Existing Vegetation Type (EVT) layer, mapped to NatureServe Terrestrial Ecological Systems via a curated crosswalk. Each EVT is linked to the USNVC (U.S. National Vegetation Classification) hierarchy through pixel-level co-occurrence analysis of LANDFIRE EVT and NatureServe IVC Group rasters across all roadless areas.

Vegetation coverage: Coverage percentages and hectares are derived from zonal statistics of the LANDFIRE 2024 EVT raster intersected with roadless area boundaries.

Ecosystem narratives and community species: Sourced from the NatureServe Explorer API, representing professional ecological assessments of vegetation composition, environmental setting, dynamics, threats, and characteristic species assemblages.

IVC hierarchy: The International Vegetation Classification hierarchy is sourced from the USNVC v3.0 Catalog, providing the full classification from Biome through Association levels.

Component associations: Plant community associations listed as components of each NatureServe Ecological System. Association data from the NatureServe Explorer API.

State ranks: Conservation status ranks assigned by NatureServe member programs in each state where the ecosystem occurs.