Index of Species Information
SPECIES: Ceanothus americanus
Introductory
SPECIES: Ceanothus americanus
AUTHORSHIP AND CITATION :
Coladonato, Milo. 1993. Ceanothus americanus. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online].
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station,
Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available:
https://www.fs.usda.gov/database/feis/plants/shrub/ceaame/all.html [].
ABBREVIATION :
CEAAME
SYNONYMS :
Ceanothus ovatus Desf.
SCS PLANT CODE :
CEAM
CEOV
COMMON NAMES :
New Jersey tea
redroot
TAXONOMY :
The currently accepted scientific name for New Jersey tea is Ceanothus
americanus L. [13]. Recognized varieties based on geographic and
morphological differences are as follows [4,35]:
C. a. var. americanus
C. a. var. pitcheri T. & G.
C. a. var. intermedius (Pursh) K. Koch.
LIFE FORM :
Shrub
FEDERAL LEGAL STATUS :
No special status
OTHER STATUS :
New Jersey tea is listed as endangered by the state of Illinois [4].
DISTRIBUTION AND OCCURRENCE
SPECIES: Ceanothus americanus
GENERAL DISTRIBUTION :
New Jersey tea has a wide distribution and ranges from Quebec to Florida;
west to Texas; and north to Minnesota [23,27,29].
ECOSYSTEMS :
FRES10 White - red - jack pine
FRES11 Spruce - fir
FRES12 Longleaf - slash pine
FRES13 Loblolly - shortleaf pine
FRES14 Oak - pine
FRES15 Oak - hickory
FRES18 Maple - beech - birch
FRES19 Aspen - birch
FRES39 Prairie
STATES :
AL AR CT DE FL GA IL IN IA KS
KY LA ME MA MI MN MS MO NE NH
NJ NY NC OH OK PA RI SC TN TX
VT VA WV WI MB ON PQ
BLM PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGIONS :
NO-ENTRY
KUCHLER PLANT ASSOCIATIONS :
K074 Bluestem prairie
K075 Nebraska Sandhills prairie
K081 Oak savanna
K082 Mosaic of K074 and K100
K093 Great Lakes spruce - fir forest
K095 Great Lakes pine forest
K096 Northeastern spruce - fir forest
K100 Oak - hickory forest
K103 Mixed mesophytic forest
K104 Appalachian oak forest
K106 Northern hardwoods
K107 Northern hardwoods - fir forest
K108 Northern hardwoods - spruce forest
K109 Transition between K104 and K106
K110 Northeastern oak - pine forest
K111 Oak - hickory - pine forest
K112 Southern mixed forest
SAF COVER TYPES :
1 Jack pine
5 Balsam fir
12 Black spruce
14 Northern pin oak
15 Red pine
17 Pin cherry
20 White pine - northern red oak - red maple
40 Post oak - blackjack oak
42 Bur oak
43 Bear oak
44 Chestnut oak
50 Black locust
52 White oak - black oak - northern red oak
55 Northern red oak
59 Yellow-poplar - white oak - northern red oak
72 Southern scrub oak
80 Loblolly pine - shortleaf pine
82 Loblolly pine - hardwood
83 Longleaf pine - slash pine
108 Red maple
110 Black oak
SRM (RANGELAND) COVER TYPES :
NO-ENTRY
HABITAT TYPES AND PLANT COMMUNITIES :
New Jersey tea is a major understory dominant in the jack pine/scrub oak
(Pinus banksiana/Quercus spp.) forests in northern Wisconsin [19]. It
is also dominant in mesic areas of mixed-grass prairies of the Midwest
[18]. Understory associates of New Jesey tea include wintergreen
(Gaultheria procumbens), hazelnut (Corylus cornuta), mockernut hickory
(Carya tomentosa), serviceberry (Amelanchier spp.), low sweet blueberry
(Vacciniuim angustifolium), Canada blueberry (V. canadense), bracken
fern (Pteridium aquilinum), Virginia strawberry (Fragaria virginiana),
striped maple (Acer pensylvanicum), northern bedstraw (Galium boreale),
raspberry (Rubus spp.), and rose (Rosa spp.) [19,24,26].
MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS
SPECIES: Ceanothus americanus
WOOD PRODUCTS VALUE :
IMPORTANCE TO LIVESTOCK AND WILDLIFE :
New Jersey tea is browsed by white-tailed deer throughout the growing
season. It is preferred browse in the spring and fall in central
Pennsylvania (5.0 to 21.8 percent relative utilization) [3]. Deer in
the Missouri Ozarks browse the twigs extensively in winter [6].
PALATABILITY :
NO-ENTRY
NUTRITIONAL VALUE :
NO-ENTRY
COVER VALUE :
NO-ENTRY
VALUE FOR REHABILITATION OF DISTURBED SITES :
Many species of the genus Ceanothus, including New Jersey tea, are well
suited for use in rehabilitation because of rapid growth rates and an
ability to improve soil fertility through nitrogen fixation [11].
OTHER USES AND VALUES :
The root of New Jersey tea is astringent. An alkaloid from the root has
been used for increasing blood coagulability, especially for the
prevention of hemorrhage from surgery [35]. The leaves were used as a
substitute for imported tea during the American Revolution [4,35].
OTHER MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS :
NO-ENTRY
BOTANICAL AND ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS
SPECIES: Ceanothus americanus
GENERAL BOTANICAL CHARACTERISTICS :
New Jersey tea is a small- to medium-size shrub from 1.5 to 3.5 feet
(0.5-1.0 m) tall with numerous, slender, ascending branches. It has
shallow, fibrous root hairs near the surface and thick, burllike, deep,
woody roots. Root crown diameter can be quite large after repeated
fires [5,14,23]. The flowers are in small clusters on long axillary
peduncles. The fruit is a three-lobed, dry, dehiscent capsule [4,13].
RAUNKIAER LIFE FORM :
Phanerophyte
REGENERATION PROCESSES :
New Jersey tea reproduces from seed and by sprouting. It is propagated
from stem or root cuttings [5,23,34].
SITE CHARACTERISTICS :
New Jersey tea is widespread and can be found on dry open plains and
prairielike areas, on sandy or rocky soils in clearings at the edge of
woods, on riverbanks or lakeshores, in woodlands, and on hillsides
[17,27,36].
SUCCESSIONAL STATUS :
Facultative Seral Species
New Jersey tea is an early- to mid-seral species [15,21]. It can
rapidly colonize disturbed sites where its nitrogen-fixing ability gives
it a competitive edge over other species [7]. New Jersey tea declines
as successional communities mature [15,21]. New Jersey tea has
disappeared from a dry sand prairie in Indiana where it was observed in
1897. Fire exclusion, woody plant invasion, and possibly pollution have
altered the structure and species composition in the area [9]. New
Jersey tea is found in greatest abundance at high light intensities
[25].
SEASONAL DEVELOPMENT :
New Jersey tea flowers from May through July. Its fruit ripens from
August to early October [23].
FIRE ECOLOGY
SPECIES: Ceanothus americanus
FIRE ECOLOGY OR ADAPTATIONS :
New Jersey tea is well adapted to fire [1,31]. After being top-killed by
fire, it sprouts from rootsocks [5]. Where frequent fires occur it
becomes a conspicuous dominant forming clusters among prairie grasses.
It also occurs in oak woods of New York where fires have occured
frequently [31]. In black oak woodlands of nortwestern Indiana, New
Jersey tea was present in 2 areas with slightly different fire regimes.
New Jersey tea cover and frequency were greater where low-severity fires
occurred at mean intervals of 5.2 years than where more severe fires
occured less often (mean fire return interval=11.1 years) [16]. In
northern Minnesota it withstood grass fires better than any other shrub
[28].
FIRE REGIMES:
Find fire regime information for the plant communities in which this
species may occur by entering the species name in the FEIS home page
under "Find Fire Regimes".
POSTFIRE REGENERATION STRATEGY :
Small shrub, adventitious-bud root crown
Initial-offsite colonizer (off-site, initial community)
FIRE EFFECTS
SPECIES: Ceanothus americanus
IMMEDIATE FIRE EFFECT ON PLANT :
New Jersey tea is typically top-killed by fire [5].
DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF FIRE EFFECT :
NO-ENTRY
PLANT RESPONSE TO FIRE :
New Jersey tea responds positively to fire. DeSelm and Clebsch [8]
reported that it showed a net increase in cover in both annual and
periodic burn treatments in Tennessee. In oak woodlands of central New
York, the average frequency of New Jersey tea was higher on burned than
unburned sites (33% vs 17%) [31]. These accidental spring burns killed
or severely injured 16 percent of the oak trees present. In an oak
savanna in east-central Minnesota, New Jersey tea was classified among
the "true prairie shrubs" that tended to increase in percent cover
following fire [32].
DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF PLANT RESPONSE :
NO-ENTRY
FIRE MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS :
NO-ENTRY
References for species: Ceanothus americanus
1. Abrams, Marc D.; Dickmann, Donald I. 1982. Early revegetation of clear-cut and burned jack pine sites in northern lower Michigan. Canadian Journal of Botany. 60: 946-954. [7238]
2. Bramble, W. C.; Goddard, M. K. 1943. Seasonal browsing of woody plants by white-tailed deer in the bear oak forest type. Journal of Forestry. 41(7): 471-475. [3298]
3. Braun, E. Lucy. 1961. The woody plants of Ohio. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Press. 362 p. [12914]
4. Bronny, Christopher. 1991. Dolomite hill prairie restoration underway at Byron Forest Preserve District (Illinois). Restoration & Management Notes. 9(2): 106-107. [17576]
5. Curtis, John T. 1959. The vegetation of Wisconsin. Madison, WI: The University of Wisconsin Press. 657 p. [7116]
6. Dalke, Paul D. 1941. The use and availability of the more common winter deer browse plants in the Missouri Ozarks. Transactions, 6th North American Wildlife Conference. 6: 155-160. [17044]
7. Delwiche, C. C.; Zinke, Paul J.; Johnson, Clarence M. 1965. Nitrogen fixation by Ceanothus. Plant Pathology. 40: 1045-1047. [16852]
8. DeSelm, H. R.; Clebsch, E. E. C. 1991. Response types to prescribed fire in oak forest understory. In: Nodvin, Stephen C.; Waldrop, Thomas A., eds. Fire and the environment: ecological and cultural perspectives: Proceedings of an international symposium; 1990 March 20-24; Knoxville, TN. Gen. Tech. Rep. SE-69. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southeastern Forest Experiment Station: 22-33. [16630]
9. Dubis, Douglas; Strait, Rebecca A.; Jackson, Marion T.; Whitaker, John O., Jr. 1988. Floristics and effects of burning on vegetation and small mammal populations at Little Bluestem Prairie Nature Preserve. Natural Areas Journal. 8(4): 267-276. [6775]
10. Eyre, F. H., ed. 1980. Forest cover types of the United States and Canada. Washington, DC: Society of American Foresters. 148 p. [905]
11. Fessenden, R. J. 1979. Use of actinorhizal plants for land reclamation and amenity planting in the U.S.A. and Canada. In: Gordon, J. C.; Wheeler, C. T.; Perry, D. A., eds. Symbiotic nitrogen fixation in the management of temperate forests: Proceedings of a workshop; 1979 April 2-5; Corvallis, OR. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University, Forest Research Laboratory: 403-419. [4308]
12. Garrison, George A.; Bjugstad, Ardell J.; Duncan, Don A.; [and others]. 1977. Vegetation and environmental features of forest and range ecosystems. Agric. Handb. 475. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 68 p. [998]
13. Gleason, Henry A.; Cronquist, Arthur. 1991. Manual of vascular plants of northeastern United States and adjacent Canada. 2nd ed. New York: New York Botanical Garden. 910 p. [20329]
14. Godfrey, Robert K. 1988. Trees, shrubs, and woody vines of northern Florida and adjacent Georgia and Alabama. Athens, GA: The University of Georgia Press. 734 p. [10239]
15. Hardin, E. Dennis. 1988. Succession in Buffalo Beats Prairie and surrounding forest. Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club. 115(1): 13-24. [4414]
16. Henderson, Norman R.; Long, James N. 1984. A comparison of stand structure and fire history in two black oak woodlands in northwestern Indiana. Botanical Gazette. 145(2): 222-228. [8721]
17. Hunter, Carl G. 1989. Trees, shrubs, and vines of Arkansas. Little Rock, AR: The Ozark Society Foundation. 207 p. [21266]
18. Kebart, Karen K.; Anderson, Roger C. 1987. Phenological and climatic patterns in three tallgrass prairies. The Southwestern Naturalist. 32(1): 29-37. [5438]
19. Kotar, John; Kovach, Joseph A.; Locey, Craig T. 1988. Field guide to forest habitat types of northern Wisconsin. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin, Department of Forestry; Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. 217 p. [11510]
20. Kuchler, A. W. 1964. Manual to accompany the map of potential vegetation of the conterminous United States. Special Publication No. 36. New York: American Geographical Society. 77 p. [1384]
21. Kurz, Herman. 1944. Secondary forest succession in the Tallahassee Red Hills. Proceedings, Florida Academy of Science. 7(1): 59-100. [10799]
22. Raunkiaer, C. 1934. The life forms of plants and statistical plant geography. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 632 p. [2843]
23. Reed, Merton J. 1974. Ceanothus L. ceanothus. In: Schopmeyer, C. S., technical coordinator. Seeds of woody plants in the United States. Agric. Handb. 450. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service: 284-290. [7576]
24. Rudolf, Paul O. 1990. Pinus resinosa Ait. red pine. In: Burns, Russell M.; Honkala, Barbara H., technical coordinators. Silvics of North America. Volume 1. Conifers. Agric. Handb. 654. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service: 442-455. [13246]
25. Shirley, Hardy L. 1932. Light intensity in relation to plant growth in a virgin Norway pine forest. Journal of Agricultural Research. 44: 227-244. [10360]
26. Smith, H. Clay. 1990. Carya tomentosa (Poir.) Nutt. mockernut hickory. In: Burns, Russell M.; Honkala, Barbara H., technical coordinators. Silvics of North America. Volume 2. Hardwoods. Agric. Handb. 654. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service: 226-233. [17165]
27. Soper, James H.; Heimburger, Margaret L. 1982. Shrubs of Ontario. Life Sciences Misc. Publ. Toronto, ON: Royal Ontario Museum. 495 p. [12907]
28. Stallard, Harvey. 1929. Secondary succession in the climax forest formations of northern Minnesota. Ecology. 10(4): 476-547. [3808]
29. Stephens, H. A. 1973. Woody plants of the North Central Plains. Lawrence, KS: The University Press of Kansas. 530 p. [3804]
30. Stickney, Peter F. 1989. Seral origin of species originating in northern Rocky Mountain forests. Unpublished draft on file at: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory, Missoula, MT; RWU 4403 files. 10 p. [20090]
31. Swan, Frederick R., Jr. 1970. Post-fire response of four plant communities in south-central New York state. Ecology. 51(6): 1074-1082. [3446]
32. Tester, John R. 1989. Effects of fire frequency on oak savanna in east-central Minnesota. Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club. 116(2): 134-144. [9281]
33. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1982. National list of scientific plant names. Vol. 1. List of plant names. SCS-TP-159. Washington, DC. 416 p. [11573]
34. Van Dersal, William R. 1938. Native woody plants of the United States, their erosion-control and wildlife values. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture. 362 p. [4240]
35. Vines, Robert A. 1960. Trees, shrubs, and woody vines of the Southwest. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press. 1104 p. [7707]
36. Voss, Edward G. 1972. Michigan flora. Part I. Gymnosperms and monocots. Bloomfield Hills, MI: Cranbrook Institute of Science; Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Herbarium. 488 p. [11471]
FEIS Home Page
https://www.fs.usda.gov/database/feis/plants/shrub/ceaame/all.html
