releve Virginia Division of Natural Heritage, see http://www.dcr.virginia.gov/natural_heritage/documents/nh_plotform_instructions.pdf
Overall Taxon Cover Values are Automatically Calculated?
no
Plot Quality Fields:
Plot Validation Level
(2) classification plot: sufficient for inclusion in a classification revision
Overall Plot Vegetation Fields:
Field Height
1
m
Field Cover
90
%
Misc Fields:
Observation Narrative
The permanent stakes installed for this plot in 2005 were relocated and the quadrat was re-sampled. Vegetation composition was dramatically different from that in 2005, when Eleocharis acicularis formed a nearly continuous turf, and rosettes of Helenium virginicum, fruiting plants of Echinodorus tenellus, and flowering/fruiting Panicum verrucosum were also locally dense. On the 2011 survey date, Eleocharis acicularis, Panicum verrucosum, and Echinodorus tenellus were not found, and the low herbaceous vegetation was strongly dominated by Trichostema dichotomum and Stachys hyssopifolia (both recorded at 25-50% cover in 2011, < 1% cover in 2005). In addition, Andropogon virginicus var. virginicus, which was not recorded in 2005, had 5-10% cover over the plot. The perennials Helenium virginicum, Panicum rigidulum var. rigidulum, and Scirpus cyperinus had very similar distribution and cover in both years, although the 2005 Helenium population consisted mostly of rosettes and the 2011 population mostly of fruiting individuals. Among low-cover associates, there were 14 taxa recorded in 2005 that were not found in 2011, and four taxa recorded in 2011 that were not found in 2005. Overall species-richness in 2011 (n = 17) was down considerably from 2005 (n = 30). Some, but not all, of these differences may be the result of differing hydrological conditions in the two years, i.e., in 2011, the pond drew down much earlier than in 2005 and vegetation had developed for a longer period .
