Ulmus rubra

Muhl.

Slippery Elm

G4Apparently Secure Found in 8 roadless areas NatureServe Explorer →
G4Apparently SecureGlobal Rank
Least concernIUCN
HighThreat Impact
Identity
Unique IDELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.128125
Element CodePDULM04090
Record TypeSPECIES
ClassificationSpecies
Classification StatusStandard
Name CategoryVascular Plant
IUCNLeast concern
Endemicoccurs (regularly, as a native taxon) in multiple nations
KingdomPlantae
PhylumAnthophyta
ClassDicotyledoneae
OrderUrticales
FamilyUlmaceae
GenusUlmus
Synonyms
Ulmus fulvaMichx.
Other Common Names
Orme rouge (FR) Red Elm (EN) slippery elm (EN)
Concept Reference
Kartesz, J.T. 1994. A synonymized checklist of the vascular flora of the United States, Canada, and Greenland. 2nd edition. 2 vols. Timber Press, Portland, OR.
Conservation Status
Rank Method Rank calculation - Biotics v2
Review Date2024-07-10
Change Date2024-07-10
Edition Date2024-07-10
Edition AuthorsN. Ventrella (2024)
Threat ImpactHigh
Range Extent>2,500,000 square km (greater than 1,000,000 square miles)
Number of Occurrences> 300
Rank Reasons
Ulmus rubra was once a widespread tree of eastern North American forests, occurring on lower slopes, alluvial flood plains, riverbanks, and bottom lands from Ontario and Quebec, Canada and North Dakota, United States south to Florida and west to Texas. Since the 1930s and 1940s, the introduction of the exotic fungus, Dutch elm disease, has impacted millions of trees and led to range-wide declines. Dutch elm disease primarily affects mature individuals, and the impact of Dutch elm disease to U. rubra populations is site-specific, with high elm sapling regeneration occurring at some sites, and conversion to competing woody species occurring at others. The Conservation Status of this species should be reviewed frequently to detect changes in the impact of the pest.
Range Extent Comments
Ulmus rubra occurs in eastern and central North America from Ontario and Quebec, Canada and North Dakota in the United States south to Florida west to Texas (FNA 1997). Range extent was estimated to be over 3 million square kilometers using herbarium specimens and photo-based observations documented between 1993 and 2024 (GBIF 2024, iNaturalist 2024, SEINet 2024).
Occurrences Comments
By applying a 1 km separation distance to herbarium specimens and photo-based observations documented between 1993 and 2024, it is estimated that there are well over 300 occurrences rangewide (GBIF 2024, iNaturalist 2024, SEINet 2024). However, this taxon is commonly cultivated, and iNaturalist observations (>11,000) were not evaluated for evidence of cultivation (iNaturalist 2024).
Threat Impact Comments
The most significant threat to Ulmus rubra is from Dutch elm disease, an introduced fungal pathogen which has killed an estimated hundreds of millions of trees since the 1930s (Brunet et al. 2016). Dutch elm targets large, mature trees, and often spares small-diameter saplings (Marks 2017). The impact of this disease to forest structure is site dependent, with elm saplings returning to some sites after mature elms are killed or reverting to competing (non-elm) tree species at other sites. This species also hybridizes with the introduced Siberian elm (U. pumila) where their ranges overlap (FNA 1997).
Ecology & Habitat

Habitat

Ulmus rubra occurs on "lower slopes, alluvial flood plains, stream banks, riverbanks, and wooded bottom lands" (FNA 1997).
Terrestrial Habitats
Forest/Woodland
Palustrine Habitats
FORESTED WETLANDRiparian
Other Nations (2)
CanadaN5
ProvinceRankNative
QuebecS3Yes
OntarioS5Yes
United StatesN4
ProvinceRankNative
South CarolinaSNRYes
MissouriSNRYes
MassachusettsSNRYes
MarylandSNRYes
District of ColumbiaSNRYes
New JerseyS4Yes
IllinoisS5Yes
TennesseeSNRYes
North DakotaS2Yes
VirginiaS5Yes
New YorkS5Yes
MississippiSNRYes
FloridaS2Yes
OhioSNRYes
North CarolinaS5Yes
WisconsinSNRYes
KentuckyS5Yes
IowaS5Yes
MinnesotaSNRYes
DelawareS5Yes
MaineSHYes
PennsylvaniaS5Yes
VermontS4Yes
TexasSNRYes
AlabamaSNRYes
OklahomaSNRYes
NebraskaSNRYes
MichiganSNRYes
West VirginiaS5Yes
ArkansasSNRYes
ConnecticutSNRYes
LouisianaSNRYes
New HampshireSNRYes
GeorgiaSNRYes
KansasS5Yes
IndianaSNRYes
South DakotaSNRYes
Rhode IslandS1Yes
Threat Assessments
ThreatScopeSeverityTiming
8 - Invasive & other problematic species, genes & diseasesPervasive (71-100%)Serious or 31-70% pop. declineHigh (continuing)
8.1 - Invasive non-native/alien species/diseasesPervasive (71-100%)Serious or 31-70% pop. declineHigh (continuing)
8.1.2 - Named speciesPervasive (71-100%)Serious or 31-70% pop. declineHigh (continuing)

Plant Characteristics
DurationPERENNIAL, Long-lived
Economic Value (Genus)No
Roadless Areas (8)
Illinois (1)
AreaForestAcres
Ripple HollowShawnee National Forest3,788
Kentucky (1)
AreaForestAcres
WolfpenDaniel Boone National Forest2,835
North Carolina (1)
AreaForestAcres
Bald MountainPisgah National Forest11,085
Virginia (2)
AreaForestAcres
Little AlleghanyGeorge Washington National Forest10,215
Shawvers Run AdditionJefferson National Forest1,927
West Virginia (3)
AreaForestAcres
Dry River (WV)George Washington National Forest7,331
Mcgowan MountainMonongahela National Forest10,504
North Mountain HopevilleMonongahela National Forest6,525
References (11)
  1. Brunet, J., Zalapa, J. and R. Guries. 2016. Conservation of genetic diversity in slippery elm (<i>Ulmus rubra</i>) in Wisconsin despite the devastating impact of Dutch elm disease. Conservation genetics 17<i>:</i>1001-1010.
  2. Burns, R. M., and B. H. Honkala, eds. 1990. Silvics of North America, vol. 2: Hardwoods. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agriculture Handbook 654, Washington, DC. 877pp.
  3. Flora of North America Editorial Committee (FNA). 1997. Flora of North America north of Mexico. Vol. 3. Magnoliophyta: Magnoliidae and Hamamelidae. Oxford Univ. Press, New York. xxiii + 590 pp.
  4. Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF). 2024. Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF) data portal. Online. Available: https://www.gbif.org/ (accessed 2024).
  5. iNaturalist. 2024. Online. Available: https://www.inaturalist.org (accessed 2024).
  6. Kartesz, J.T. 1994. A synonymized checklist of the vascular flora of the United States, Canada, and Greenland. 2nd edition. 2 vols. Timber Press, Portland, OR.
  7. Kartesz, J.T. 1999. A synonymized checklist and atlas with biological attributes for the vascular flora of the United States, Canada, and Greenland. First edition. In: Kartesz, J.T., and C.A. Meacham. Synthesis of the North American Flora, Version 1.0. North Carolina Botanical Garden, Chapel Hill, N.C.
  8. Little, E.L., Jr. 1979. Checklist of United States trees (native and naturalized). Agriculture Handbook No. 541. U.S. Forest Service, Washington, D.C. 375 pp.
  9. Marks, C.O. 2017. The Ecological Role of American Elm (<i>Ulmus americana</i> L.) in Floodplain Forests of Northeastern North America. In: Pinchot, C.C., K.S. Knight, L.M. Haugen, C.E. Flower, and J.M. Slavicek, eds. Proceedings of the American elm restoration workshop 2016; 2016 October 25-27; Lewis Center, OH. Gen. Tech. Rep. NRS-P-174. Newtown Square, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station: 74-98.
  10. Marks, C.O. and C.D. Canham. 2015. A quantitative framework for demographic trends in size-structured populations: analysis of threats to floodplain forests. Ecosphere 6(11): 55.
  11. Southwest Environmental Information Network (SEINet). 2024. Collections Databases. Online. Available: https://swbiodiversity.org/seinet/collections/index.php (accessed 2024).