Elemental Composition of 

Selected Native Plants and 

Associated Soils from Major 

Vegetation-Type Areas in Missouri 

By JAMES A. ERDMAN, HANSFORD T. SHACKLETTE, 

and JOHN R. KEITH 

GEOCHEMICAL SURVEY OF MISSOURI 

GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 954-C 

An examination of statewide geochemical 

variations as indicated by plant 

and soil analyses 

UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON,: 1976 
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

THOMAS S. KLEPPE, Secretary 

GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

V. E. McKelvey, Director 

Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data 

Erdman, James A. 

Elemental composition of selected native plants and associated soils from major vegetation-type areas in Missouri. 

(Geochemical survey of Missouri) (Geological Survey Professional Paper 954-C) 

Bibliography: p. 

Supt. of Docs. no.: I 19.16:9 54-C 

1. Soils-Missouri. 2. Botany-Missouri-Ecology. 3. Plants-Chemical analysis. 4. Biogeochemistry-Missouri. 5. Plant-soil 

relationships. 

I. Shacklette, Hansford T., joint author. II. Keith, John R., joint author. III. Title: Elemental composition of selected native 

plants and associated soils ... IV. Series. V. Series: United States Geological Survey Professional Paper 954-C. 

S599.M52E73 631.4'9778 75-619421 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office 

Washington, D.C. 20402 

Stock Number 024-001-02838-7 
CONTENTS 

Abstract ............................................ . 

Introduction ......................................... . 

Description of vegetation types ........................ . 

Floodplain Forest ................................ . 

Glaciated Prairie ................................. . 

Unglaciated Prairie ............................... . 

Cedar Glade ..................................... . 

Oak-hickory Forest ............................... . 

Oak-hickory-pine Forest .......................... . 

Methods of sampling plants and soils .................... . 

Sampling design ................................. . 

Sampling techniques .............................. . 

Plants ...................................... . 

Soils ........................................ . 

Page 

C1 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

6 

7 

8 

8 

10 

10 

11 

Page 

Laboratory procedures used . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C12 

Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 

Geochemical characteristics and variability of uncultivated soils . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 

Univariate statistical analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 

Q-mode factor analysis......................... 19 

Chemical composition and variability of selected 

native plants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 

Correspondence between the elemental composition of 

selected plant species and that of associated 

uncultivated soils . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 

Summary and conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 

References cited . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 

ILLUSTRATIONS 

Page 

FIGURE 1. Map showing physical divisions, southern limit of glaciation, and counties in Missouri. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C3 

2. Map showing major vegetation-type areas, location of quadrangles where soils and plants were sampled in sampling 

stages 1a and 1b, and counties in Missouri. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 

3. Map showing counties, county seats, and major drainage features in Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 

4-9. Photographs: 

4. A cypress tree that remained after a stand of the Floodplain Forest had been destroyed by lumbering and 

farming operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 

5. A remnant of the bluestem prairie, Glaciated Prairie vegetation type...................................... 5 

6. A shrub association in a fencerow, Unglaciated Prairie vegetation type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 

7. Characteristic species of the Cedar Glade vegetation type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 

8. Overstory and understory vegetation of the Oak-hickory Forest vegetation type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 

9. Oak-hickory-pine Forest vegetation type on ridges and slopes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 

10-43. Maps and histograms showing vegetation-type areas classified according to average concentrations of elements and pH 

in uncultivated soils from Missouri: 

10. Aluminum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 

11. Arsenic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 

12. Barium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 

13. Boron . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 

14. Calcium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 

15. Carbon, carbonate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 

16. Carbon, organic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 

17. Chromium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 

18. Cobalt......... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 

19. Copper . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 

20. Fluorine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 

21. Gallium........ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 

22. Iron............................. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 

23. Lanthanum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 

24. Lead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 

25. Lithium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 

26. Magnesium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 

III 
IV CONTENTS 

FIGURE 10 - 43. Maps and histograms-Continued Page 

TABLE 

27. Manganese. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C49 

28. Mercury..................................................................................... 50 

29. Nickel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 

30. Phosphorus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 

31. Potassium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 

32. Scandium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 

33. Selenium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 

34. Silicon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 

35. Sodium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 

36. Strontium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 

37. Titanium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 

38. Vanadium.................................................................................... 60 

39. Ytterbium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 

40. Yttrium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 

41. Zinc......... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 

42. Zirconium.................................................................................... 64 

43. pH........................................................................................... 65 

44. Factor variance diagram for uncultivated soils of Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 

45-48. Maps showing dominance of materials in soils, as indicated by composition loadings based on soil chemistry in 

vegetation-type areas of Missouri: 

45. Alumina-rich parent material................. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 

46. Quartz sand parent material........................................ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 

47. Carbonate parent material . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 

48. Felspathic sand facies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 

49- 63. Maps showing vegetation-type areas classified according to average concentration of elements and ash in sumac 

from Missouri: 

49. Barium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 

50. Cadmium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 

51. Calcium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 

52. Lead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 

53. Magnesium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 

54. Manganese. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 

55. Nickel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77 

56. Phosphorus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78 

57. Potassium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 

58. Selenium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 

59. Sodium .............................................................. ,....................... 81 

60. Strontium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82 

61. Titanium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 

62. Zinc......... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84 

63. Ash......................................................................................... 85 

64. Diagrams showing correlations between the concentrations of selected elements in sumac stems and those of 

1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

5. 

6. 

7. 

8. 

associated soils from six vegetation-type areas in Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86 

TABLES 

Page 

Analytical methods used in this study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C12 

Approximate lower limits of determination for elements in soils and plant materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 

Elements commonly looked for, but rarely or never detected, by semiquantitative spectrographic analysis, and 

their approximate lower limits of determination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 

Variance of errors attributed to laboratory procedures based on duplicate analyses of uncultivated soils and native 

plants from Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 

Components of variance estimated for samples of uncultivated Missouri soils collected in stages 1a and 1b of the 

sampling plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 

Mean chemical composition and chemical variation of uncultivated soils from six vegetation-type areas in 

Missouri. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 

Statistics used to assess adequacy of stage 1b sampling for distinguishing vegetation-type areas on the basis of soil 

analyses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 

Geographic patterns of variation in chemical elements and pH of uncultivated soils from Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 
CONTENTS v 

Page 

TABLE 9. Composition scores for the Varimax Q-mode model describing compositional variations in the uncultivated soils from 

Missouri. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C20 

10. Chemical composition and mineralogy of soil samples with first alltd second highest absolute loadings on each of four 

factors in the factor model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 

11-13. Components of logarithmic variance estimated for: 

11. Sumac stems collected in sampling stages la and 1b from six vegetation-type areas in Missouri.......... . . . . . 21 

12. Buckbush from five vegetation-type areas in Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 

13. White oak from the Oak-hickory Forest and the Oak-hicko1·y-pine Forest areas in Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 

14. Statistics used to assess adequacy of stage 1b sampling for distinguishing vegetation-type areas on the basis of plant 

analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 

15-20. Mean chemical composition and chemical variation in: 

15. Sumac stems from six vegetation-type areas in Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 

16. Buck bush stems from five vegetation-type areas in Missouri.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 

17. Species characteristic of the Floodplain Forest in Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 

18. Species characteristic of the Cedar Glade area in Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 

19. Species characteristic of the Oak-hickory Forest in Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 

20. Species characteristic of the Oak-hickory-pine Forest in Mi:ssouri......................................... 28 

21. Geographic patterns of variation in chemical elements in ash of sumllC stems from Missouri. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 

22. Correlation coefficients for the concentrations of selected elements in sumac stems and in associated soils from six 

vegetation-type areas in Missouri. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 

GEOCHEMICAL SURVEY OF MISSOURI 

ELEMENTAL COMPOSITION OF SELECTED NATIVE PLANTS AND 

ASSOCIATED SOILS FROM MAJOR VEGETATION-TYPE AREAS 

IN MISSOURI 

By JAMES A. ERDMAN, HANSFORD T. SHACKLETTE, and JOHN R. KEITH 

ABSTRACT 

The native plants in Missouri can be grouped into six principal 

vegetation types whose general areas are physiographically 

defined. Representative plant species and associated soils, sampled 

in each vegetation-type area according to a geographically nested 

(hierarchical) design, were analyzed for about three dozen chemical 

elements. 

Analysis of variance and Duncan's (1955) multiple range test 

demonstrated that the concentrations of most elements in 

uncultivated soils differ significantly between the areas. Moreover, 

the areal patterns of variability for many elements are strikingly 

similar, which indicates a large degree of interdependency and 

suggests that these elements reflect some common underlying 

control on chemical variability. Q-mode factor analysis indicated 

that there are at least four such controls (factors). These four 

factors are believed to reflect the different compositions of soil 

parent materials as found in the prairies, cedar glades, upland 

forests, and floodplain forests. 

A similar statistical analysis of the elemental composition of 

stems of sumac, a shrub common throughout the State, revealed 

only a few differences between vegetation-type areas, and these 

differences are thought to be caused largely by soil pH. The 

correlation is generally weak between the chemical composition of 

stems of several tree and shrub species and the composition of 

associated soils in each area. Compositional variability in ash of 

native plants appears to be mostly local in scale, and individuals of 

a single species growing within a few miles of each other tend to be 

as chemically different as individuals growing at opposite ends of 

the State. 

INTRODUCTION 

The influences of vegetation on the kinds and 

concentrations of chemical elements in surficial 

materials and waters, and on the biological component 

of the natural environment, are of such importance 

that the chemical composition of plants must be 

considered in a comprehensive geochemical survey of 

an area. Plants are a direct link in the complex chain of 

inorganic and organic processes of environmental 

geochemistry, in that chemical elements from the 

geologic source material or its weathered products 

are absorbed and translocated to above-ground plant 

organs, combined to form complex organic compounds 

in plants and in animals that feed on the plants, and 

then finally released through death and decomposition 

of the organisms to return to surficial deposits and 

waters. This interplay between inorganic and organic 

geochemical processes tends to redistribute the 

elements in surficial materials by concentrating some 

elements in upper soil horizons and, through 

solubilization, causing the downward displacement, or 

loss in surface runoff, of others. The nature of these 

processes of element mobility was first formalized by 

Goldschmidt (1954), and the concentration of elements 

in upper soil horizons was designated the Goldschmidt 

enrichment principle (Rankama and Sahama, 1955, p. 

333-334). 

A study of the botanical segment of the geochemical 

cycle, therefore, must serve to evaluate the role of 

soil-plant interactions in the movements and 

concentrations of elements. Our objectives in this 

study emphasized this concept in that, first, the 

geochemistry of the plants and soils were 

characterized separately on the basis of conceptual 

units of vegetation at a regional scale and, second, 

correlations of element concentrations in the two 

natural materials were determined. The resulting 

geochemical evaluations of soil-plant interactions 

could then be examined on a regional basis in relation 

to the results of geochemical studies of rocks, 

unconsolidated geologic deposits, soils, and waters in 

Missouri that were conducted concurrently by other 

members of the U.S. Geological Survey. 

Cl 
C2 GEOCHEMICAL SURVEY OF MISSOURI 

The scope and general objectives of these studies 

were outlined previously by the U.S. Geological 

Survey, (1972a) and by Connor, Erdman, Tidball, and 

Feder (1972); they were discussed further by Miesch 

(1976). These reports emphasized that the Missouri 

geochemical investigations were considered to 

constitute a pilot study of how to effectively conduct a 

geochemical survey of a large area by means of 

efficient methods of sampling and sampling design and 

the collection and synthesis of geochemical data in a 

rigorous, scientifically defensible manner. Special 

efforts were made in these studies to unify 

methodology in sampling, chemical analysis, statistical evaluation, and data presentation for the several 

disciplines so that results from each study would be 

directly comparable with results of the other studies, 

insofar as appropriate. 

Informal collaboration of the Geological Survey 

projects and the Environmental Health Surveillance 

Center, University of Missouri, was promoted by 

seven semiannual releases of progress reports (U.S. 

Geological Survey, 1972a-f, 1973) which described 

the current status of the geochemical studies and gave 

results of these studies as they became available. The 

Surveillance Center was simultaneously conducting 

epidemiological studies in Missouri in the search for 

possible geographical patterns of animal and human 

health problems that might correspond to patterns of 

geochemical abundances in natural materials. In order 

to make our geochemical data readily useful in 

epidemiological and other studies, regional-scale maps 

of element abundance in the several sampling media 

were prepared, where possible. 

The plant and soil data obtained in this study not 

only enabled regional geochemical patterns to be 

delineated, but also· were sufficiently extensive to 

permit "normal" or baseline geochemical values to be 

established for some soils and plant species. These 

baseline values, used in conjunction with geochemical 

data from local areas, formed the basis for appraising 

an occurrence of roadside pollution from the transport 

of lead ore (Connor, Shacklette, and Erdman, 1971), 

and a problem of metabolic imbalance in beef cattle 

that was attributed to contamination from a clay 

mining operation (Ebens and others, 1973). 

The diverse types of vegetation and soils that are 

present in Missouri can be conveniently divided into 

two large categories encompassing (a) native 

vegetation and associated uncultivated soils, and (b) 

cultivated vegetation (largely field crops) and 

agricultural soils, some of which have been cultivated 

for more than a century. Both categories of materials 

are geochemically important-the first to provide 

insight regarding the natural geochemical environment, the second to permit realistic evaluations to be 

made of the effects of cultivation on the abundance and 

distribution of the elements and to furnish baseline 

geochemical data for some field crops. The study 

described in this report was directed at only the native 

plants and uncultivated soils. Results of the cultivated 

plants and soils study are presented in a separate 

report (Erdman and others, 1976). 

We are indebted to many U.S. Geological Survey 

colleagues for their assistance during this study. A. T. 

Miesch provided valuable guidance both in 

coordinating the Missouri geochemical studies as a 

whole and in the use of statistical techniques. R. J. 

Ebens and R. W. White provided determinations of 

soil minerals. Jessie M. Bowles drafted the maps of 

element distribution, and Josephine G. Boerngen 

assisted in computer processing the data. Plant 

materials were chemically analyzed by Thelma F. 

Harms, Harriet G. Neiman, and Clara C. S. Papp. The 

soil samples were prepared for analysis by John 

Moreland, and were analyzed by Leon A. Bradley, F. 

W. Brown, G. T. Burrow, Joseph W. Budinsky, J. P. 

Cahill, I. C. Frost, Johnnie Gardner, B. A. McCall, 

Leung Mei, Violet M. Merritt, Roosevelt Moore, 

Harriet G. Neiman, Ramona L. Rahill, G. D. Shipley, 

M. W. Solt, J. A. Thomas, J. S., Wahlberg, and T. L. 

Yager. We acknowledge with gratitude the facilities 

and services provided by Dr. Carl J. Marienfeld and 

his associates of the Environmental Health 

Surveillance Center, University of Missouri. 

DESCRIPTION OF VEGETATION TYPES 

In undertaking a geochemical survey of an area as 

large as Missouri one must deal with the mass of 

plants (vegetation) covering the landscape, rather 

than with individual species which in this State 

number about 2,438 (Steyermark, 1963, p. 1665). 

Vegetation was defined by Gray (1967, p. 561) as "the 

sum total of plant growth in a given area." A more 

practical definition, however, is the one by Kuchler 

(1964, p. 1), who stated, "Vegetation may be defined 

as the mosaic of phytocenoses [plant communities] in 

the landscape." Plant communities, considered as 

discrete entities are, therefore, units of vegetation 

that are convenient to use in looking for 

biogeochemical similarities or differences among 

areas. 

Plant communities can be recognized and named to 

suit the needs of a specific research study. The 

communities considered in this report are based on 

species of the higher (vascular) plants only, and are 

the conceptual units of vegetation on which we based 

our plant and soil sampling design. The potential 
COMPOSITION OF PLANTS AND SOILS FROM MAJOR vgGETATION-TYPE AREAS C3 

natural vegetation of the conterminous United States 

was organized into broad plant communities or 

vegetation types, and the areas occupied by these 

types were mapped at a scale of 1:3,168,000, by 

Kuchler (1964). In order to avoid certain complexities 

in mapping at this scale, particularly the problem of 

including or excluding cultivated fields or forests and 

urban areas, Kuchler (1964, p. 1-2) used the concept 

of "potential natural vegetation" in delineating 

vegetation types, and defined the concept as "the 

vegetation that would exist today if man were 

removed from the scene and if the resulting plant 

succession were telescoped into a single moment." 

Following this concept, the parts of Missouri that he 

mapped as "mosaic of Bluestem Prairie and 

Oak-hickory Forest" are, in fact, largely cultivated 

farmland at present. 

Because of the relationship of topography and type 

of surficial materials to the habitat requirements of 

plant species, any reasonable organization of 

vegetation types in Missouri, including that of 

Kuchler, will result in patterns of vegetation types 

that correspond to a relatively high degree with 

physiographic regions or provinces as, for example, 

those outlined by Fenneman (1946) and U.S. 

Geological Survey (1968, p. 8-9) that are illustrated 

in figure 1. We chose Kuchler's organization of 

vegetation types as the general basis for our sampling 

0 

I I I I 

0 50 

50 

I I 

100 MILES I 

100 Kl LOMETRES 

FIGURE !-Physical divisions, southern limit of glaciation, and 

counties in Missouri. Physical divisions follow those of Fenneman 

(1946); glacial boundary from American Association of Petroleum 

Geologists (1966). 

plan in Missouri, but we made some modifications of 

his organization which we believe are more relevant to 

geochemical studies. 

FLOOJ)PLAIN FOREST VEGETATION TYPE 

The part of this vegetation type (fig. 2) that occurs 

in Missouri is a northern extension of the principal 

area lying along the lower reaches of the ~ssissippi 

River, as mapped by Kuchler (1964). This area In 

Missouri fornr1erly was densely forested swampy land 

on which the dominant tree species were tupelo 

(Nyssa aquatica), cypress (Taxodium distichum), _and 

many species of oaks (Quercus sp.). The land has s~ce 

been cleared of timber and drained by the construction 

of many large ditches in the southeastern corner of the 

state (fig. 3) to the extent that the forest ~as virt~ally 

disappeared and has been replaced by cultivated fields 

of soybeans, (~otton, and other crops (fig. 4). The trees 

that are now present generally grow along the 

drainage ditches and roadsides, where at many p~aces 

they are being eradicated by means of herbicides. 

50 100 MILES 

50 100 KILOMETRES 

EXPLANATION 

r0»/J Glaciated Prairie 

~ Ungladated Prairie 

C=:J Oak-hickory Forest 

[:~>~::~::::::~::~:j Oak-hickory-pine Forest 

r~~~:a Cedar Glade 

C=:J Floodplain Forest 

o Location of quadrangles 

that were sampled in 

stage 1a 

e Location of quadrangles 

that were sampled in 

stage 1 b 

• Location of quadrangles 

that were sampled in 

both stages 1 a and 1 b 

FIGURE 2.-Majorvegetation-type areas (modified from KUchler, 

1964) location of quadrangles where soils and plants were 

sampied in sampling stages la and lb, and counties in Missouri. 
C4 GEOCHEMICAL SURVEY OF MISSOURI 

These trees were not dominant species in the original 

forests, but because they reproduce freely and are 

tolerant of the dryer soils that resulted from effects of 

the drainage ditches, have persisted in the area. 

Prominent among these species are willow oak 

(Quercus phellos) and sweetgum (Liquidambar 

styraciflua). Sumac (Rhus glabra), a shrub, also occurs 

in the area. 

The soils· of this area have weakly developed 

horizons (U.S. Soil Conservation Service, 1969), but 

zonation with depth is common and reflects changes in 

the nature of the alluvial deposits at a location with 

N 

time. Consequently, the texture of the surficial soil 

may range from sand to dark clay within the lateral 

extent of only a few metres. 

GLACIATED PRAIRIE VEGETATION TYPE 

Kuchler (1964) mapped the vegetation of the entire 

prairie region of northern and western parts of 

Missouri as one type, the "mosaic of Bluestem Prairie 

and Oak-hickory Forest." Because the prairie area 

lying north of the Missouri River was largely 

glaciated, whereas the prairie area south and west of 

this river generally was not glaciated (fig. 1), we 

expected soils of the two areas to be geochemically 

0 50 100 MILES 

0 50 100 KILOMETRES 

FIGURE 3.-Counties, county seats, and major drainage features in Missouri. Parellellineations shown in the southeastern corner of 

the State are agricultural drainage ditches. 
COMPOSITION OF PLANTS AND SOILS FROM MAJOR VEGETATION-TYPE AREAS C5 

FIGURE 4.-A cypress tree that remained after a stand of the 

Floodplain Forest had been destroyed by lumbering and farming 

operations, New Madrid County, This tree (Taxodium distichum) 

measured approximately 1.3 m in diameter 2 m above the ground 

surface. Soybeans are now cultivated in the nearly level field. 

The grove on the horizon, consisting of second-growth trees, 

borders a drainage ditch. Photographed September 24, 1971. 

different to the extent that plant chemistry might be 

affected. Accordingly, we divided Kuchler's prairie 

mosaic area into glaciated and unglaciated parts, the 

former corresponding to the Dissected Till Plains and 

the latter being largely included in the Osage Plains 

(fig. 1). This division followed, in part, that of 

Steyermark (1963, p. xix), who divided the Prairie 

Region into three subdivisions-loess mounds (narrow 

strips along the Missouri River), unglaciated, and 

glaciated. 

Krusekopf (1957, p. 20), in discussing the effects of 

vegetation on soil formation in Missouri, wrote: 

Approximately 40 per cent of the state originally was prairie, 

mainly big bluestem. * * * The vegetation factor has great 

significance in determining the great soil groups- brunizems and 

planosols on the grasslands, and gray-brown podzolic in the 

forested area. * * * Although forest is dominant in this climate, 

the prairie maintained itself under virgin conditions. In the 

"tension zone," the equilibrium was disturbed by man and the 

forest invaded the prairie. In the prairie region, prairie and forest 

exist side by side, in an intricate pattern, determined largely by 

topography, that is, grass on the level areas and trees on the 

slopes. Soils of the great soil groups, therefore, occur intermingled 

in close association. 

The prairie component of this vegetation-type area 

at present is largely under cultivation or pastured by 

farm animals, therefore the mosaic of Bluestem 

Prairie and Oak-hickory Forest as mapped by Kiichler 

has virtually disappeared. Only scattered remnants of 

the Bluestem Prairie are now present, and they occur 

in fence rows, on roadsides, and in other small areas 

that are not cultivated (fig. 5). A few areas of very 

limited extent, though nearly flat, have never been 

plowed, and they support an unbroken cover of prairie 

grasses and forbs. We examined one such remnant, 

locally known as Tucker Prairie (Kucera and others, 

1963) which lies in Callaway County about 17 miles 

(27 .2 km) east of Columbia (fig. 3), in order to learn its 

composition and structure as a basis for identifying 

this vegetation type at our sampling sites. 

Small groves of oak and hickory trees at some 

homesteads appear to represent the forest component 

of this vegetation mosaic, but these forested areas are 

easily confused with the extensions of the Oak-hickory 

Forest vegetation type within the general area of 

prairies, as shown in figure 2. Soils and plants in these 

forested com;>onents of the mosaic were not sampled. 

FIGURE 5.-A remnant of the bluestem prairie, Glaciated Prairie 

vegetation type, Chariton County. Big blue stem grass 

(Andropogon gerardi) in right foreground is about 2 m tall. 

Prairie forbs are in the center of the picture, and trees and 

shrubs in the background outline fencerows. Photographed 

August 30, 1970. 

UNGLACIA TED PRAIRIE VEGETATION TYPE 

The pre-settlement mosaics of vegetation in this 

area and those of the glaciated area probably were 

similar. The vegetation of the two areas is still 

generally similar in that land of slight to moderate 

relief is commonly used for the cultivation of corn, 

soybeans, and other field crops and pasture grasses, 

with remnants of the native vegetation persisting only 

in waste places (fig. 6). Several small areas of 

potential prairie, as mapped by Kiichler (1964), lie 

outside the principal area of the Unglaciated Prairie. 

These outlier areas are recognized by the present or 

historic occurrence of treeless patches in a region 
C6 GEOCHEMICAL SURVEY OF MISSOURI 

FIGURE 6.-A shrub association in a fencerow, Unglaciated 

Prairie vegetation type, Barton County. The tall fruiting shrubs 

in the foreground are sumac (Rhus glabra) and the low shrubs 

are buckbush (Symphoricarpos orbiculatus); both are widely distributed in this State. Trees and shrubs in this area are generally 

restricted to fencerows. Photographed September 4, 1970. 

otherwise largely forested, as attested at some 

locations by place names such as West Plains in 

Howell County and East Prairie in Mississippi County 

(fig. 3.). These outlier prairie areas, because of their 

small size, were not included in the principal sampling 

plan for the State, but were considered in a separate 

study. 

CEDAR GLADE VEGETATION TYPE 

The existence and extent of this distinctive 

vegetation type are dependent on the occurrence of 

near-surface deposits of limestone or dolomite, and a 

ground surface usually having low to moderate relief. 

The development and unique floral composition of 

cedar glades vegetation were described by Quaterman 

(1950), who defined cedar glades as open spaces 

surrounded by cedar (Juniperus virginiana) where the 

limestone is at or near the surface. Some investigators 

have distinguished cedar glades, which occur on 

nearly level terrain, from cedar barrens or cedar 

bluffs that develop on more precipitous outcrops of 

limestone or dolomite (Anderson and Lemmon, 1973, 

p. 140). We made no such distinctions in this study; we 

considered all areas to be cedar glades that had 

shallow seasonally dry soils over these rock types 

where cedar trees were the dominant overstory 

species and where the distinctive associated species 

formed the ground cover. 

Typical cedar glades (fig. 7) have a parklike aspect, 

with symmetrical cedar trees spaced a few to tens of 

metres apart, and a ground cover composed 

principally of little bluestem grass (Andropogon 

scoparius) and poverty grass (Sporobolus neglectus 

var. ozarkanus) mixed with fewer numbers of forbs 

that are largely restricted to this habitat, including 

palafoxia (Palafoxia callosa) and American aloe (Agave 

virginica). The thin (2 - 20 em) highly organic soil over 

FIGURE 7.-Characteristic species of the Cedar Glade vegetation 

type, Ozark County. Cedar (Juniperus virginiana) trees are dominant, and are associated with lesser numbers of other trees 

including white ash (Fraxinus americana), buckthorn (Bumelia 

lycioides), and redbud (Cercis canadensis). Little bluestem grass 

(Andropogon scoparius) forms the principal ground cover. Photographed September 26, 1970. 

the bedrock is circumneutral to basic in reaction, with 

poorly developed zonality. Soils of this area were 

designated "glade-rock soils" by Kucera and Martin 

(1957, p. 290). 

The cedar glades furnish limited pasturage for 

livestock, but no commercial timber except the cedar 

trees that are occasionally felled. The land is not 

cultivated, therefore it probably exists today in much 

the same condition as before settlement. The area 

mapped as cedar glades by Kuchler (1964) is actually a 

mosaic of Oak-hickory Forest and Cedar Glades 

vegetation types, with cedar glades composing only a 

small part of the area. Small, but typical, cedar glades 

occur outside the designated area mapped in figure 2; 

these glades were not sampled. 

OAK-HICKORY FOREST VEGETATION TYPE 

Oak-hickory forests formerly covered large areas in 

the central United States which were grouped as the 

Oak-Hickory Forest region by Braun (1950, p. 

162 -163), who described the region as follows: 

The most westerly forest region of the deciduous forest is one in 

which oaks are dominant and hickories usually more or less 

abundant. This region extends from Texas to Canada; it varies in 

width from place to place and is frequently interrupted by prairie. 

Oak-Hickory Forest is best developed and most continuous in the 

Interior Highlands-the Ozark and Ouachita Mountains region. It 

is widely distributed north of that region, where it extends over 

the older drift of the upper Mississippi Valley and into the Driftless 

area, and, in Minnesota, over the younger drift as a narrow band at 

the western margin of forest. * * * Along the western border of 

the Oak-Hickory Forest region, and southwestward in Texas, 

decreased precipitation results in transition to prairie. Here are 
COMPOSITION OF PLANTS AND SOILS FROM MAJOR VEGETATION-TYPE AREAS C7 

savannah forests, scrubby oak communities, and tongues of 

woodland along the streams in the Prairie region. • • • The 

boundaries of the Oak-Hickory Forest region are very irregular 

and indefinite, except along its contact with the Mississippi alluvial 

plain in Arkansas and Missouri. 

The extent of this vegetation type in Missouri, as 

mapped by Kuchler (1964), is given in figure 2. This 

area is not homogeneous in forest species composition; 

several species of oak and hickory alternate as 

dominants from place to place in response to 

physiographic and edaphic site conditions, and zones 

transitional to prairie and oak-hickory-pine communities are common. Land of low to moderate relief is 

generally devoted to farming, and the forest is 

represented only by isolated groves that have 

remained from the original forest. Land of more 

extreme relief, some of which is in national forests, is 

largely uncultivated although extensively logged, and 

dense second-growth stands cover large areas (fig. 8). 

Extensions of this vegetation type that follow 

drainage features northward in Missouri differ 

markedly from the central area, in that soils reflect 

the influence of stream alluvium, and species 

composition of the forest tends toward a 

predominance of wetland species including sycamore 

(Platanus occidentalis), red maple (Acer rubrum), and 

elms (Ulmus americana and U. rubra). These 

northward extensions of the vegetation type area 

were not sampled. 

OAK-IDCKORY-PINE FOREST VEGETATION TYPE 

The area of this vegetation type in Missouri is 

separated from the principal area in southeastern 

United States, as mapped by Kuchler (1964). This 

type was recognized as only a facies of the 

Oak-Hickory Forest region by Braun (1950, p. 167), 

who referred to pine-oak communities within the 

region. The greater part of the area shown in figure 2 

as Oak-hickory-pine Forest actually is a mosaic of 

oak-hickory forests on the more mesic sites and 

oak-pine communities at sites over sandstone that 

are more xeric. This relationship of the two 

communities, however, is stated only as a generality; 

the composition and structure of the many 

communities within the broad vegetation type are 

complex, and probably are controlled by subtle 

differences in topography and soils or soil parent 

materials. At some xeric sites a scrub oak (Quercus 

stellata and Q. marylandica) community occurs where 

an oak-pine community would be expected. 

Steyermark (1963, p. 42- 43) stated that in 

Missouri shortleaf pine "Grows on acid, non-calcareous soils, associated with sandstone, chert, or 

granitic rock, in rocky wooded ravines, bluffs, steep 

slopes, tops of narrow ridges, dry uplands, or in 

FJGURE 8.-0verstory and understory vegetation of the 

Oak-hickory Forest vegetation type, Christian County. The 

principal tree species are white oak (Quercus alba), red oak 

(Quercus rubra), black oak (Quercus velutina), bitternut hickory 

(Carya cordiformis), and shagbark hickory (Carya ovata). Understory shrubs include sumac (Rhus glabra) and buckbush (Symphoricarpos orbiculatus). Photographed September 27, 1970. 

valleys along streams where the soil has sand, chert, 

or granitic components." 

Pine (Pinus echinata) trees were observed to form 

almost pure stands at only a few localities (principally 

on ridge summits) within this vegetation-type area. 

More commonly, pines occur only as scattered 

individual trees in a predominantly oak-hickory 

community (fig. 9). Areas of reforestation bear pure 

stands of loblolly pine (Pinus taeda), a species not 

native to Missouri. These stands can be easily 

distinguished from stands of shortleaf pine, and were 

not sampled in this study. A small disjunct area of 

Oak-hickory-pine Forest in southwestern Missouri 

was not sampled. Within the main area of the 

vegetation type, soils and plants were sampled only if 

shortleaf pine occurred at the locality. 
C8 GEOCHEMICAL SURVEY OF MISSOURI 

FIGURE 9.-0ak-hickory-pine Forest vegetation type on ridges 

and slopes, Shannon County. Shortleaf pine (Pinus echinata) 

trees grow intermixed with deciduous tree species that are 

characteristic of the Oak-hickory Forest vegetation type. Photo· 

graphed September 24, 1970. 

METHODS OF SAMPLING PLANTS AND SOILS 

SAMPLING DESIGN 

The principal objectives in sampling the vegetation 

of Missouri were to determine the major variations in 

the chemical composition of plants that grew 

throughout the State or that were considered to be 

representative of vegetation units in the State, and to 

investigate the relationships of their chemical 

composition to that of the associated soils. The 

boundaries of the vegetation-type areas that were 

previously described served to outline the categories 

or mapped units at which the sampling was directed. 

Sampling for the purpose of describing the major 

differences between these areas constituted phase 1 of 

a general sampling plan for geochemical surveys of 

large regions that was described by Connor and others 

(1972) and by Miesch (1976). No sampling of the phase 

2 type was conducted. 

The phase 1 sampling was accomplished in two 

stages called 1a and 1b by Miesch (1976). Stage 1a was 

used to estimate the magnitude of variability in 

chemical composition of the sampled materials at 

various geographic scales. Based on these results, an 

estimate was made of the amount of additional 

sampling necessary in stage 1b to achieve the desired 

degree of stability (Miesch, 1976) in any resultant 

geochemical maps. 

Sampling in stage 1a was based on a three-level 

geographically nested design in which each level is 

associated with a specific range of scales. The top level 

represents the six vegetation-type areas as modified 

from Kuchler (1964). The two lower levels represent, 

respectively, 71/2-minute topographic quadrangles 

within areas, and sites within quadrangles. One soil 

sample and one plant sample from each of two or more 

species were collected at each site. The geographic 

units at the two lower levels were selected for 

sampling by formal randomization procedures, in an 

attempt to reduce sampling bias. 

The general statistical model employed was: 

(1) 

where Xijk represents the concentration of an 

element, or other constituent, reported by the analyst 

in a soil or plant sample at the kth site taken from the 

jth 71/2-minute quadrangle of the ith vegetation-type 

area; and ).1. is the average concentration of the element 

in the material under study within all areas of the 

State. airepresents the difference between the true 

mean concentration of an element in the ith 

vegetation-type area and the grand mean, ).1. ; {3 ij 

represents the difference between the true mean 

concentration for the jth quadrangle and the mean of 

the ith vegetation-type area, and the 'Yijk represents, 

in part, the difference between the element 

concentration of the sample at the kth site and the 

mean of the jth quadrangle of the area. Included in the 

last term, 'Y ijk. are all effects of sample preparation 

and laboratory analysis, commonly referred to as 

"analytical error." 

The model in equation 1 follows a specific case of the 

analysis of variance termed the hierarchical, or 

"nested" case, discussed in mathematical detail by 

Krumbein and Slack (1956) and described as it applies 

to the Missouri studies by Miesch (1976). The terms 

a i. {3ij. and 'Yijk are assumed to be random variables 

with means of zero and variances of u & , u J , and u ~ . 

The goal of the sampling design is to obtain unbiased 

estimates of these variances. Thus, the total 

variability of the element x, estimated as si, may be 

partitioned into thre·e components of variance: 
COMPOSITION OF PLANTS AND SOILS FROM MAJOR VEGETATION-TYPE AREAS C9 

(2) 

where s~estimates the regional (statewide) variation 

between vegetation-type areas, s ~ estimates the 

large-scale geographic variation between quadrangles within areas, and s ~estimates small-scale 

geographic variation between sites within quadrangles plus the variance attributable to analytical 

error. 

With the exception of the silicon and pH data for 

soils, the variance components were estimated on 

logarithmic transforms (base 10) of the. data, because 

the concentrations of most elements-particularly the 

trace elements-tended to have marked positive 

skewness in their frequency distributions. 

For stage 1a sampling, a 6-5-2 design was used 

consisting of six vegetation-type areas, five 

quadrangles from each area, and two sites within each 

quadrangle for a total of 60 sites. Quadrangles that 

overlapped two vegetation types about equally were 

excluded from the population of quadrangles that was 

to be sampled. 

All samples were analyzed in a completely and 

formally randomized sequence in order to circumvent 

any effects of systematic analytical bias. A small 

number of duplicate samples used to estimate the 

magnitude of analytical error were included in this 

sequence. In effect, these duplicate analyses 

constitute a lower fourth level of the sampling design. 

(See the section "Laboratory procedures used.") 

Results of the analysis of variance of the soil and 

plant data collected in stage 1a provided estimates of 

the three components of variance in equation 2: 

between-vegetation-type variance, between-quadrangle variance, and the sum of between-site and 

analytical variance. These components not only shed 

light on the geographic aspects of elemental variation 

in Missouri but may also be used to assess the 

reproducibility of any mean values computed from the 

stage 1a results. In addition, they are useful in 

estimating the amount of additional sampling that may 

be required to insure a given reproducibility of such 

means. 

An investigation of the reliability of any areal mean 

that is to be used for constructing a geochemical map 

begins with an examination of the variance ratio, v 

(Miesch, 1976): 

v=Nv/Dv=s:i/(s ~+s~), (3) 

where Nv is the estimated variance between 

vegetation-type areas and Dv is the estimated 

variance within areas. The larger v is, the smaller is 

the number of randomly-selected samples, nr, needed 

to describe geochemical differences between areas. 

The terms v and nr are related to the F-statistic, as 

follows: 

F=1+nrv, (4) 

where F is the value of the conventional F-statistic at 

some specified confidence level. 

Miesch (1976) gave graphs for determining the 

minimum acceptable value of nr, and the maximum 

acceptable error variance associated with each 

vegetation-type area mean is given by: 

(5) 

The observed error variance for each vegetationtype area mean is: 

(6) 

where n{3 and n-y are, respectively, the numbers of 

quadrangles (five) sampled in each area and the 

number of samples (two) collected within each 

quadrangle. If E8 is less than or equal to Er, 

differences between the observed areal means based 

on the stage 1a sampling are accepted as meaningful. 

If not, additional sampling (stage 1b) is required in 

each area before the observed differences among areal 

means can be accepted with confidence. 

The utility of a given sample suite (whether from 

stage 1a or 1 b) for distinguishing between means may 

be assessed in terms of a variance mean ratio (Miesch, 

1976) defined as: 

(7) 

This ratio may be viewed as an index of stability. The 

larger vm is, the more stable are any observed 

differences between areas. In this study, we have 

defined an acceptable value of vm as one which 

exceeds the variance mean ratio when based on the 

acceptable maximum error variance (Er) for the 

95-percent confidence level. The critical value of Vm in 

our studies is defined as 

Vm( 0.95) =Nv/Er. (8) 

On the basis of these considerations, it was found 

necessary to employ a stage 1b sampling program in 

order to insure that each areal mean was based on a 

sufficient number of samples so that the important 

statewide chemical variation in soils and plants could 

be displayed on maps. We determined that a stage 1b 

sampling plan based on the same nested arrangement 

as stage 1a but consi~ting of a 6-10-5 plan (instead of a 

6-5-2 plan) would fulfill this need. 
C10 GEOCHEMICAL SURVEY OF MISSOURI 

After the average geochemical characteristics of 

each vegetation-type area had been estimated, maps 

were constructed to show at a glance which of the 

vegetation-type areas were believed to be different 

from the others with respect to most chemical 

constituents. Such maps, even though of satisfactory 

stability, shown only the gross or broad-scale 

geochemical variations over the State in the sampled 

materials. They are of poor resolution in the sense 

that Miesch (1976) uses this term. 

The map of potential natural vegetation by Kuchler 

(1964) includes a number of small areas in Missouri 

that are geographically separated from the principal 

vegetation-type area to which they are assigned. 

These outlier areas were not formally included in the 

sampling design, because we were uncertain if the 

chemistry of their soils and plants corresponds more 

closely to that of their assigned classification or to that 

of the vegetation-type area surrounding them. As a 

test of this relationship, three soil samples were 

collected at random in each of six representative 

outlier areas and classified chemically by stepwise 

discriminant function methods. (See Dixon, 1968.) Of 

the 18 samples from outlier areas, the chemical 

classification of only two agreed with the classification 

of samples from the vegetation-type areas to which 

KUchler assigned them. Most of the outlier samples 

were clearly more similar in chemical composition to 

samples from adjacent areas. For this reason, the 

geochemical map patterns given in this report do not 

differentiate these outlier areas. 

SAMPLING TECHNIQUES 

A pronounced "roadside effect" on the natural 

geochemical regime was found (Connor, Erdman, and 

others, 1971; Connor, Shacklette, and Erdman, 1971) 

at sites in Missouri near heavily traveled highways, as 

evidenced by unusually high concentrations of lead, 

zinc, and some other metals in plant and soil 

samples from these sites. We restricted sampling to 

sites as far as practicable from major roads in order to 

preclude or at least minimize this roadside effect. This 

precaution was not always feasible in sampling the 

prairie vegetation-type areas, inasmuch as sites 

where the required plant species grew were 

invariably along fencerows that commonly paralleled 

a road. However, contamination that could be 

attributed to vehicular traffic was not demonstrated 

(with but few exceptions) in samples of this report. 

A site for collecting samples of native plants and 

uncultivated soils was defined as an area in which the 

required species of plants could be found rooted in a 

soil unit that was judged to be relatively 

homogeneous. The extent of the sampling site area 

was considered to be within a radius of about 10 m 

from the point that was selected for sampling the soil. 

This radius was extended at some sites in order to 

include a desired species in the sampling area, if the 

same soil unit extended into this enlarged area. 

These constraints imposed on sample site selection 

did not impede sampling in the Glaciated Prairie 

vegetation-type area because only two plant 

species-sumac and buckbush-were sampled, and 

they were generally abundant. In the Oak-hickorypine Forest area, on the other hand, a complete suite 

of samples of the desired species (sumac, buckbush, 

white oak, shagbark hickory, and pine) was impossible 

to obtain at some sites. 

Several sites that were selected from quadrangle 

maps proved on examination in the field to be 

inadequate by our sampling criteria, in that one or 

more of the principal species could not be found at the 

sites. Alternate sites, consequently, were selected on 

a random basis from the quadrangles being sampled. 

Because some of the desired species could not be found 

either at the sites that were originally selected or at 

the alternate sites, some suites of plant species 

samples were of necessity incomplete. As an example 

of this deficiency, sumacs were found at 295 of a 

possible 300 sites that were sampled throughout 

Missouri. The resulting incomplete data set, however, 

caused only minor difficulties in statistical analyses of 

the data. In contrast to sumac, buckbush was found at 

only 4 of a possible 50 sites in the Floodplain Forest 

area, consequently buckbush was omitted in the 

chemical characterization of native plants from this 

area. 

PLANTS 

It is obviously impractical to sample all of the large 

number of plant species that occur in Missouri. Of the 

two major plant lifeforms, herbaceous and woody, we 

chose only woody (tree and shrub) species for 

sampling. This decision was based on the fact that 

woody plants usually are long lived and deeply rooted, 

in contrast to herbaceous species which commonly are 

short lived and shallowly rooted. We believe that 

woody plants, therefore, generally have a better 

opportunity to accumulate elements from their 

environment and to better integrate annual and 

seasonal fluctuations in element absorption than have 

herbaceous species. This belief is supported by the 

results given by Shacklette, Erdman, and Keith (1973) 

in their comparisons of element concentrations in 

woody plants and herbaceous vegetables. 

Each vegetation-type area in Missouri includes 

several to many species of woody plants. We decided 

to collect two kinds of species-those that grow 
COMPOSITION OF PLANTS AND SOILS FROM MAJOR VEGETATION-TYPE AREAS C11 

statewide, and those that characterize only one or two 

vegetation-type areas. Two species that generally 

occur throughout Missouri, sumac and buckbush, 

were sampled to obtain a measure of biogeochemical 

variability throughout the State as a whole. Woody 

plant species characteristic of each vegetation-type 

area were sampled to obtain an estimate of 

biogeochemical characteristics and variability within 

each area. For example, white oak, shagbark hickory, 

and shortleaf pine, among others, were sampled in the 

Oak-hickory-pine Forest vegetation-type area. 

The kinds of plants that were sampled, and their 

scientific names as given by Steyermark (1963) 

follow: 

Sumac, Rhus gkLbra L. 

Buckbush, Symphoricarpos orbicukLtus Moench 

Post oak, Quercus steUata Wang. 

White oak, Quercus alba L. 

Willow oak, Quercus phellos L. 

Sweetgum, Liquidambar styraciflua L. 

Shagbark hickory, Carya ovata (Mill.) K. Koch 

Cedar, Juniperus virginiana L. 

Shortleaf pine, Pinus echinata Mill. 

Plant samples consisted of stems about 30 em long 

that were cut with shears from the terminal part of 

branches. In sampling deciduous trees, leaves were 

removed from the stems and discarded, the stems only 

being collected for analysis. The decision to follow this 

procedure was based on economy in sampling and 

analysis, and was supported by a conclusion of an 

earlier biogeochemical study in Georgia by Shacklette, 

Sauer, and Miesch (1970, p. C38), who stated, "The 

concentrations of elements in stems and leaves are 

strongly related. Where high concentrations occur in 

the stems, high concentrations are also found in the 

leaves." 

It is impractical to remove the scalelike leaves from 

cedar stems, therfore both leaves and stems were 

included in the samples. In order to achieve a degree 

of uniformity in sampling coniferous trees, the leaves 

and stems were likewise included in the samples of 

pine. All plant samples were cut into 5 -10 em 

segments, sealed in quart-size freezer cartons, and 

shipped to the Denver laboratories. 

SOILS 

We decided to sample only one horizon at a site in 

order to promote economy in sampling and analysis of 

soils from the vegetation-type areas. This decision 

was supported by studies of soils from two distinct 

areas of Georgia by Shacklette, Sauer, and Miesch 

(1970), who stated (p. C35), "Because of the 

similarities in element content of soil horizons at a 

sample site, the differences in concentrations of 

almost all elements in uncultivated soils from the two 

areas could have been determined by sampling any 

one of the three soil horizons." 

We selected the B horizon of uncultivated soils for 

sampling because this horizon is considered to be the 

zone of greatest accumulation of materials that are 

removed from the A, or upper, soil horizon; 

accordingly, the B-horizon soils would seem to offer 

the greatest opportunity for study of a wide variety of 

elements. Movement of materials in the solum (the A 

and B horizons of a zonal soil) was described by 

Hawkes and Webb (1962, p. 94- 95) as follows: 

Under moist conditions and free drainage, the more soluble 

constituents leached from the A horizon will descend to the water 

table and eventually pass into surface drainage. Some suspended 

matter may follow the same course. More usually, however, 

colloidal sesquioxides and clays eluviated from the A horizon are 

soon redeposited in the zone of accumulation, or iUuviation, 

constituting the B horizon. As a result, the B horizon 

characteristically tends to be enriched in clay relative to the A 

horizon and to assume a red- or yellow-brown color in those profiles 

where illuviation involves iron sesquioxides. 

Metals indigenous to the parent material vary in their response 

during the development of soil horizons. Soluble metals and those 

incorporated or adsorbed on clays and colloids are liable to be 

removed from the A horizon whereas those contained in resistant 

primary minerals are liable to be enriched in that horizon. Metals 

taken up by deep-rooted plants will be returned to the surface in 

the organic debris, and their subsequent fate will depend on the 

stability of their organic compounds in the A1 horizon. Some of the 

metals which are removed from the A horizon may tend to 

accumulate along with hydrous Fe and Mn oxides or clays in the B 

horizon. 

The uncultivated soils sampled at each site were 

collected from holes made by using a clamshell digger 

or a trowel, depending on which of the two was 

appropriate for use at the site, at a depth which we 

judged to reflect the structural and color features of 

the B horizon. This depth ranged from considerably 

less than 30 em in upland areas of the Ozark Plateaus 

to about 80 em in the well-developed soils of the 

northern prairies. The highly organic lithosols 

typical of the Cedar Glades commonly are only a few 

centimetres thick and occur in shallow depressions on 

carbonate bedrock. In some upland forested areas a 

dense layer of coarse chert fragments commonly 

occurs at a depth of about 15 em, which restricts the 

depth of soil sampling; at these localities, and 

generally in the Cedar Glade area, a well-developed B 

horizon was not present, therefore samples were 

taken from the lowest level of the sampling hole. 

Conspicuous rock fragments were culled from the 

sample, and about 300-400 g of the remaining soil 

material was put in a waterproof paper envelope and 

shipped to the Denver laboratories. 
C12 GEOCHEMICAL SURVEY OF MISSOURI 

LABORATORY PROCEDURES USED 

Before submitting plant samples from the 1b stage 

of sampling to the laboratories for chemical analysis, 

we selected 50 samples at random from the total of 950 

of all species that were collected. These selected 

samples were divided into two approximately equal 

parts in order to obtain duplicate analyses, then 

merged with the 900 samples that had not been 

divided. After reordering the entire set of 1,000 

samples in a sequence that was random with respect 

to both geographical location and to species which 

were, therefore, unknown by the analysts, the 

samples were submitted for analysis. 

TABLE 2.-Approximate lower limits of determination for elements 

in soils and plant materials 

[Dry soil was used for analyses of all elements. Dry plant material was used for arsenic, 

fluorine, iodine, mercury, and selenium analyses; plant ash was used for analyses of 

all other elements. Limits are given in parts per million. Leaders ( ... ) in figure 

columns indicate no data available) 

Lower limit of Lower limit of 

Element determination Element determination 

Soils Plant materials Soils Plant materials 

AI ....... 10,000 50 Li ••••• 0. 5 4 

As ....... .2 .25 Mg •••• 0. 300 50 

B ........ 20 50 Mn •••• 0. 1 2 

Ba ....... 1.5 3 Mo 3 5 

The plant samples were prepared for analysis by air 

drying and then pulverizing in a Wiley mill. A part of 

the pulverized material was weighed, then burned to 

ash in an electric oven in which the heat was increased 

50°C per hour to a temperature of 500°C and held at 

this temperature for 14 hours. The resulting ash was 

then weighed to determine the ash yield of the dry 

plant material. Analytical methods for most elements 

employ a weighed aliquot of the ash. For determining 

concentrations of a few elements that would be 

volatilized and lost by burning the sample, weighed 

aliquots of the dry plant material were used for 

analysis. 

Be ....... 1 

C, in COa. 100 

C, organic 1,000 

Ca ....... 1,000 

Cd ....... 1 

Ce ....... 150 

Co ....... 3 

Cr ....... 1 

Cu ....... 1 

F ........ 40 

Fe ....... 11,000 

Ga ....... 5 

Hg ....... 

I ........ 

K ........ 1,000 

La ....... 30 

~In Fe203 Total 

2 

100 

.5 

300 

1 

2 

2 

.5 .

220 

5 

.01 .025 

1 

100 

70 

Na ....... 100 100 

Nb ....... 10 

Nd ....... 70 150 

Ni ....... 5 2 

P ........ 300 40 

Ph ....... 10 20 

Se ....... .1 .01 

Sc ....... 5 7 

Si ....... 10,000 

Sr ....... 5 10 

Ti ••• 0 0 •• 2 5 

V ........ 7 5 

Y ........ 10 20 

Yb ....... 1 2 

Zn ....... 10 25 

Zr ....... 10 20 

By following the same procedures used for dividing 

and randomizing plant samples, we divided 30 samples 

of soil to provide duplicates, the 60 resulting 

duplicates were then merged with the 270 samples 

that were not divided, and the total of 330 samples 

were submitted to the laboratories in a randomized 

order. 

The soil samples were dried in an oven with 

circulating air held at about 50°C before the samples 

were pulverized in a ceramic mill to approximately 

minus-100-mesh particle size. Before being pulverized, the samples were not sifted through a 200-mesh 

sieve, as is done in some soil studies, therefore rock 

TABLE 1.-Analytical methods used in this study 

Name of method Elements and plant ash 

commonly reported 

Six-step emission spectrographic .......... In soils and plant ash: B, Ba, Be, Cr, Cu, 

Ga, La, Mn, Mo, Nb, Ni, Ph, Sc, Sr, Ti, 

V, Y, Yb, and Zr. 

In soils only: Co. ·· - In plant ash only: AI, Fe, and Mg. 

Atomic absorption, flame ................. In soils and plant ash: Cd, Li, Na, and Zn. 

In soils only: Mg. 

In plant ash only: Ca, Co, and K. 

Atomic absorption, flameless ............. In soils and dry plant material: Hg. 

X-ray fluorescence ...................... In soils: AI, Ca, Fe, K, P, Se, and Si. 

Colorimetric ............................ In plant ash only: P. 

In dry plant material and soils: As. C~talytic ............................... In dry plant material only: I. 

Selective ion electrode ................... In dry plant material and soils: F. 

Gasometric ............................. In soils only: Carbonate carbon. 

Calculated .............................. In soils only: Organic carbon. 

2-3 diaminonaphthtalene fluorimetric ...... In dry plant material only: Se. 

Gravimetric ............................ In dry plant material only: Ash. 

Principal reference 

Myers, Havens, and Dunton (1961). 

Ward, Nakagawa, Harms, and VanSickle 

(1969). 

Vaughn (1967). Unpublished modification used 

for plants. 

Liebhofsky, Pfeiffer, Winslow, and Zemany 

(1960). 

Ward, Lakin, Canney, and others (1963). 

Cuthbert and Ward (1964). 

Ingram (1970). 

Tourtelot, Huffman, and Rader (1964). 

Do. 

No data available. 

Ward, Lakin, Canney, and others (1963). 
COMPOSITION OF PLANTS AND SOILS FROM MAJOR VEGETATION-TYPE AREAS C13 

TABLE 3.-Elements commonly looked for, but rarely or never 

detected, by semiquantitative spectrographic analysis, and their 

approximate lower limits of determination in parts per miUion for 

samples in this report 

[Leaders ( ... ) in a figure column indicate that the element is commonly detected in the 

sample material listed in the column heading] 

Material analyzed Material analyzed 

Element Element 

Soils Plant ash Soils Plant ash 

Arsenic ..... 1,000 2,000 Palladium ... 1 2 

Antimony ... 150 300 Platinum .... 30 70 

Bismuth ..... 10 20 Praseodymium~. 100 200 

Cadmium .... 20 50 Rhenium .... 30 70 

Cerium ...... 150 300 Samarium2 ... 100 200 

Dysprosium1 . 50 100 Silver ....... .5 .5 

Erbium 1 ..... 50 100 Scandium .... 7 

Europium2 ... 100 200 Tantalum .... 200 500 

Gadolinium1 .. 50 100 Tellurium 2,000 5,000 

Germanium .. 10 20 Terbiuml.::: 300 700 

Gold ........ 20 50 Thallium .... 50 100 

Hafnium ..... 100 200 Thorium ..... 200 500 

Holmium1 .... 20 50 Thulium~ .... 20 50 

Indium ...... 10 20 Tin ......... 10 15 

Lithium ..... 50 100 Tungsten .... 100 300 

Lutetium1 ... 30 70 Uranium .... 500 1,000 

Neodymium 70 150 Zinc ........ 200 

Niobium ..... 10 20 

1 Looked for if yttrium is greater than 50 ppm. 2 Looked for is lanthanum or cerium is found. 

TABLE 4.-Variance of errors attributed to laboratory procedures, 

based on duplicate analyses of uncultivated soils and native plants 

from Missouri 

[Variance components calculated on data transformed to logarithms, except as noted. 

Leaders ( ... ) in figure column indicate no data available] 

Soils Plants Soils Plants 

. Element, Component Component Element, Component Component ash, or n=60 n=lOO ash, or n=60 n=lOO pH (30 pairs) (50 pairs) pH (30 pairs) (50 pairs) 

AI ........ 0.00300 0.04263 Mg ....... 0.00556 0.01643 

As ........ .00698 Mn ....... .02261 .01975 

B ......... .01385 .01411 Na ........ .02307 .01793 

Ba ........ .01310 . 02977 Ni ........ .00986 .01771 

C, in CO a .. . 19020 P ......... .02877 .00526 

C, organic . .01624 Pb ........ .00821 .04097 

Ca ........ .01759 .00157 Sc ........ .00836 

Cd ........ .00714 Se1 ........ .03334 .00687 

Co ........ .01222 Si ........ 11.15 

Cr- ........ .00874 .03164 Sr ........ .01544 .01342 

Cu ........ .03490 .01796 Ti ........ .00575 .03049 

F ......... . 14937 v ......... .00515 

Fe ........ .00188 .02568 Y ......... .00610 

Ga ........ . 01246 Yb ........ .00872 

Hg ........ . 06799 Zn ........ .00257 .00657 

K ......... . 00912 .00198 Zr ........ .02906 

La ........ . 00717 Ash ....... .00168 

Li ........ .00069 H2 ....... .02900 

1 Error component derived from nontransformed data. 

2 Error component expressed in standard units. 

particles larger than this mesh size were retained and 

pulverized in some samples. 

The methods of analysis used for all samples of the 

Missouri geochemical study were described in detail 

by Miesch (1976). The methods used for analysis of 

plant and soil samples are outlined in table 1. 

The approximate lower limits of determination for 

materials analyzed in this study are given in table 2. 

All samples of both soils and plants were analyzed 

first by semiquantitative emission spectrophotometry, and the concentrations reported for many 

elements were satisfactory for our purposes, as is 

indicated in table 2. Many other elements were 

commonly looked for by this analytical method, but 

were rarely or never detected. These elements are 

listed in table 3. 

The error attributed to laboratory procedures, 

based on the duplicate analyses, is given in table 4 as 

variance components. By comparing these components with the final or lowest components _in the 

nested analysis of variance, one can estimate the 

extent to which laboratory error affects the apparent 

natural variability. Owing to vagaries in the selection 

of samples for duplicate analysis, the analytical 

variance component in some cases exceeded the 

variance component at the locality level. For such 

occurrences, as for example with fluorine in the 

uncultivated soils, one can only interpret the disparity 

to mean that most if not all of the local variability is 

more correctly attributed to laboratory procedures 

than to natural causes. 

RESULTS 

GEOCHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS AND VARIABILITY OF 

UNCULTIVATED SOILS 

UNIVARIATE STATISTICAL ANALYSIS 

Estimated components of chemical variability (as 

variance) in uncultivated B-horizon soils in Missouri 

are listed in table 5. Each of these components is 

associated with one of the geochemical sampling units 

(vegetation-type areas, quadrangles within areas, and 

sites within quadrangles). A comparison of the 

estimated logarithmic variance components based on 

analyses of the soils collected in both sampling stages 

1a and 1b indicates that these estimates are 

reasonably reproducible. They agree, for the most 

part, within a factor of two, and show substantially 

the same proportion of total variance at each of the 

three levels of the sampling design. 

All 34 elements and soil pH in samples of the 1b 

sampling stage exhibit statistically significant 

variation (at the 95-percent confidence level) at 

statewide scales-that is, among vegetation-type 

areas. In addition, most of the properties measured 

exhibit a relatively large part of their variation at this 

scale, indicating that maps of this variation could be 

meaningful tools in an assessment of the major 

geochemical variations across the State. 
C14 GEOCHEMICAL SURVEY OF MISSOURI 

TABLE 5.-Components of variance estimated for samples of uncultivated Missouri soils coUected in stages la and 1 b of the sampl't"ng plan 

[First and second lines of data following each element give components derived from stages la and lb sampling, respectively. Variance calculated on data transformed to logarithms, 

except as noted. Asterisk (*), significantly greater than zero at the 0.05 probablity level. Leaders ( ... ) in figure column indicate no data available I 

Variance 

Between areas Between quadrangles Between sites 

Total 

Element, loglo Component, Percent of Component, Percent of Component, Percent of 

or pH variance sti total sp total 

s2 

"Y total 

AI ............ 0.04593 *0.02730 55 *0.00448 9 0.01775 35 

As ........... 

.06443 •. 01115 17 *.00803 12 .04515 70 

B ............ .03591 0 <1 .00361 10 .03230 90 

.02602 *.00264 10 .00139 5 .02199 85 

Ba ........... .05880 *.01770 30 .00629 11 .03481 59 

.06926 *.02118 30 *.01626 23 .03182 46 

C, carbonate .. 

.45277 *.12758 28 .00993 2 .31526 70 

C, organic ..... 

.10299 *.04500 44 .00202 2 .05597 54 

Ca ........... 

.33837 *.20049 59 *.02719 8 .11069 33 

Co ........... .05727 .00636 11 .00436 8 .04655 81 

.05752 *.00439 8 *.00435 7 .04878 85 

Cr ........... .03431 *.00969 28 .00435 13 .02027 59 

.04849 *.01721 35 *.00547 11 .02581 53 

Cu ........... .06399 .00852 13 *.02697 42 .02850 45 

.08142 *.00908 11 *.00899 11 .06335 78 

F ............ 

.14251 *.03356 23 *.01031 7 .09864 69 

Fe ........... 

*.02239 *.00332 6 .05260 43 .02635 51 

Ga ........... .07183 *.03633 51 .00944 13 .02606 36 

.06789 *.02820 42 *.00693 10 .03276 48 

Hg ........... 

.12628 *.03720 29 .00458 4 .08450 67 

K ............ .04608 *.01164 25 *.01254 27 .02190 48 

La ........... 

.02090 *.00411 20 *.00236 11 .01443 69 

Li ............ 

.03895 *.01514 39 *.00414 11 .01967 51 

Mg ........... 

.19132 *.10137 53 *.01285 7 .07710 40 

Mn ........... .17501 *.01666 10 0 <1 .15835 90 

.13203 *.10532 12 *.01601 12 .10070 76 

Na ........... 

.12190 *.06442 53 *.01901 16 .03848 32 

Ni ............ .06464 *.01191 18 *.01926 30 .03347 52 

.09832 *.02861 29 *.01557 16 .05414 55 

P ............ 

.08760 *.03289 38 *.00669 8 .04802 55 

Pb ........... .02529 *.00804 32 .00276 11 .01449 57 

.03469 *.00255 7 *.00341 10 .02872 83 

Sc ............ .05742 *.03144 55 .00289 5 .02309 40 

.05230 *.02064 40 -•. 00645 12 .02521 48 

Se ........... 

.12912 *.03312 26 *.01089 8 .08511 66 

Si 1 ........... 

164.02 *77.04 47 3.58 2 83.40 51 

Sr ............ .08030 *.03010 37 *.01662 21 .03358 42 

.06808 *.03050 45 *.01144 17 .02614 38 

Ti ............ .04957 *.01981 40 .00410 8 .02566 52 

.03821 *.01238 32 *.00439 12 .02144 56 

v ............ .07414 *.03447 47 .00618 8 .03349 45 

.06763 *.02866 42 *.00742 11 .03155 47 

y ............ .03483 *.01121 32 0 <1 .02362 68 

.04351 *.00601 14 *.01020 23 .02730 63 
COMPOSITION OF PLANTS AND SOILS FROM MAJOR VEGETATION-TYPE AREAS C15 

TABLE 5. -Components of variance estimated for samples of uncultivated Missouri soils coUected in stages 1 a and 1 b of the sampling 

plan-Continued 

Variance 

Between areas Between quadrangles Bet ween sites Total Element, log 10 Component, s2 or pH variance a 

Yb ........... 0.03280 0.01464 

.03988 •.00644 

Zn ........... .05488 *.01559 

Zr ............ .10171 *.04204 

.07483 

pH2 .......... 

*.02550 

.92250 *.58844 

1 Variance components derived from nontransformed data. 

2 Variance components expressed in standard units. 

Percent of 

total 

45 

16 

28 

41 

34 

62 

Component, Percent of Component, Percent of 

s~ s2 total -y total 

0.00386 12 0.01430 43 

*.00819 21 .02524 63 

*.00742 14 .03187 58 

0 <1 .05967 59 

*.01077 14 .03856 52 

*.03004 3 .33402 35 

TABLE 6.-Mean chemical composition and chemical variation of uncultivated soils from six vegetation-type areas in Missouri 

[Mean concentrations given in parts per million except where percent or parts per billion (ppb) are indicated. Dry soil used for chemical analyses; soil slurry used for pH 

determinations. GM, geometric mean, except as indicated; GD, geometric deviation, except as indicated; Ratio, number of samples in which detected to total number of samples; 

leaders ( ... ), no data available. Tests using analysis of variance techniques indicated that differences were significant at the 0.05 probability level for concentrations of certain 

elements in soils from the vegetation-type areas that had the highest and lowest concentrations of these elements, as indicated by boldface and italic, respectively. Because of 

insufficient data, differences in concentrations of Be, Ce, Mo, Nb, and Nd were not tested) 

Vegetation-type area 

Floodplain Glaciated Unglaciated Cedar Oak-hickory Oak-hickory-pine 

Element, or pH Forest Prairie Prairie Glade Forest Forest 

GM GD Ratio GM GD Ratio GM GD Ratio GM GD Ratio GM GD Ratio GM GD Ratio 

AI, percent ............... 4.4 1.29 50.50 6.0 1.21 50:50 4.7 1.34 50:50 3.2 1.42 50:50 2.7 1.47 50:50 2.1 1.63 50:50 As ....................... 7.5 2.03 50:50 13 1.27 50:50 12 1.55 50:50 8.4 1.73 50:50 8.0 1.83 50:50 6. 7 1.67 50:50 B ........................ 29 1.44 46:50 33 1.38 49:50 35 1.40 50:50 27 1.48 43:50 39 1.41 49:50 32 1.43 49:50 Ba ....................... 660 1.43 50:50 560 1.46 50:50 490 1.58 50:50 250 1.61 50:50 390 1.78 50:50 340 1.96 50:50 Be ....... ················ .99 1.46 33:50 1.2 1.29 46:50 1.3 1.27 47:50 .88 1.47 27:50 .77 1.42 20:50 .77 1.47 21:50 

C, carbonate, percent ...... .046 3.06 45:50 .055 2.95 44:50 .01,63.34 42:50 .40 8.43 47:50 .054 4.14 44:50 .055 3.11 45:50 C, organic, percent ......... .89 2.09 50:50 .83 1.69 50:50 .98 1.48 50:50 2.8 1.64 50:50 .96 1.69 50:50 . 70 1.81 50:50 Ca, percent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .42 1.75 50:50 .38 1.36 50:50 .24 1.79 49:50 1.7 4.52 49:50 .15 2.80 46:50 .065 2.44 28:50 Ce ...................... ~150 0:50 97 1.36 11:50 110 1.34 16:50 <150 5:50 78 1.45 6:50 <150 2:50 Co. ······················ 8.3 1.72 50:50 11 1.55 50:50 14 1.83 50:50 9.5 1.48 50:50 10 1.71 49:50 9.5 1.89 50:50 

Cr ....................... 39 1.80 50:50 66 1.15 50:50 65 1.23 50:50 42 1.51 50:50 43 1.45 50:50 30 1.67 50:50 Cu ....................... 15 1.99 50:50 24 1.66 50:50 18 1.63 50:50 17 1.94 50:50 13 1.99 50:50 12 1.88 50:50 F ........................ 250 2.21 50:50 460 1.54 50:50 360 1.71 50:50 410 2.18 50:50 190 2.40 50:50 160 2.66 50:50 Fe, percent ............... 2.1 1.69 50:50 3.5 1.26 50:50 3.5 1.53 50:50 1.9 1.43 50:50 1.9 1.43 50:50 1.5 1.51 50:50 Ga. .............. 12 1.53 50:50 19 1.40 50:50 14 1.51 50:50 11 1.64 47:50 8.4 1.54 48:50 5.9 1.92 37:50 

Hg, ppb .................. 57 2.07 50:50 68 1.70 50:50 46 1.76 50:50 160 2.39 50:50 55 1.91 50:50 45 2.05 50:50 K, percent ................ 1.8 1.14 50:50 1.5 1.28 50:50 1.3 1.45 50:50 1.7 1.50 50:50 1.1 1.61 50:50 .86 1.96 50:50 La ....................... 32 1.24 46:50 39 1.35 50:50 45 1.37 50:50 33 1.36 45:50 35 1.37 46:50 30 1.31 40:50 Li ........................ 20 1.63 50:50 32 1.21 50:50 29 1.33 50:50 23 1.55 50:50 18 1.33 50:50 15 1.41 50:50 Mg, percent ............... .31 1.80 50:50 .54 1.38 50:50 .35 1.57 50:50 .84 3.06 50:50 .18 2.25 50:50 11 1.67 50:50 

Mn ....................... 710 2.72 49:50 1,30 2.25 50:50 780 2.29 50:50 1,200 1.57 50:50 730 2.16 50:50 660 2.09 50:50 Mo ....................... <3 1:50 <3 4:50 <3 1:50 <3 3:50 <3 2:50 <3 1:50 Na, percent ............... .62 1.65 50:50 .50 1.45 50:50 .31 1.62 50:50 .13 1.70 50:50 .27 2.01 50:50 .19 1.86 50:50 Nb .................... 5.8 1.38 7:50 7.9 1.24 19:50 8.1 1.26 22:50 <10 1:50 8.0 1.38 22:50 7.9 1.36 21:50 Nd ....................... 46 1.36 11:46 60 1.21 27:50 61 1.18 30:50 37 1.55 8:45 47 1.35 12:48 36 1.47 5:43 

Ni ....................... 19 1.65 50:50 23 1.49 50:50 20 1.88 49:50 23 2.31 49:50 12 1.82 47:50 8.8 1.75 47:50 P, percent .. .068 1.86 49:50 .033 1.58 44:50 .038 1.56 47:50 .0831.73 50:50 .033 1.88 40:50 .030 1.67 42:50 Ph ...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 1.56 49:50 19 1.31 50:50 24 1.50 50:50 25 1.52 50:50 23 1.50 50:50 18 1.64 49:50 Sc ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.1 1.58 42:50 12 1.34 50:50 10 1.33 50:50 6.8 1.59 43:50 5.4 1.49 37:50 1,.7 1.78 30:50 Se. ····················· .31 2.78 42:50 .73 2.11 49:50 .67 1.64 50:50 .31 2.10 46:50 .31 1.90 48:50 .27 2.01 46:50 

Si, percent ··············· 36 7.70 50:50 32 5.06 50:50 34 6.82 50:50 29 17.42 50:50 39 7.43 50:50 41 5.68 50:50 Sr ....................... 120 1.32 50:50 120 1.35 50:50 95 1.51 50:50 72 1.51 50:50 66 1.66 50:50 1,2 1.90 50:50 Ti, percent ................ .26 1.51 50:50 .37 1.30 50:50 .39 1.34 50:50 .19 1.43 50:50 .35 1.44 50:50 .33 1.61 50:50 V ....... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 1.87 50:50 110 1.34 50:50 92 1.39 50:50 59 1.58 50:50 53 1.48 50:50 37 1.70 50:50 Y ........................ 23 1.63 48:50 30 1.30 50:50 37 1.35 50:50 22 1.79 49:50 27 1.50 50:50 22 1.69 49:50 

Yb ....................... 2.1 1.56 48:50 3 1.27 50:50 3.4 1.42 49:50 2 1.66 49:50 2.8 1.44 50:50 2.4 1.69 50:50 Zn ....................... 54 1.67 50:50 67 1.41 50:50 51 1.41 50:50 54 1.71 50:50 36 1.59 50:50 30 1.62 50:50 Zr ....................... 160 1.93 50:50 210 1.42 50:50 300 1.52 50:50 120 1.68 50:50 300 1.63 50:50 260 1.74 50:50 plf2 ...................... 5.8 .68 50:50 5.3 .50 50:50 5.3 .38 50:50 7.3 .51 50:50 5.6 .81 50:50 5.5 .65 50:50 

1 Arithmetic means and standard deviations. 

2 Standard units and stand deviations. 
C16 GEOCHEMICAL SURVEY OF MISSOURI 

In general, however, the largest amount of 

variation occurs at the lowest level-between samples 

collected within the 71

12-minute quadrangles. The 

variance components at this level constitute, for the 

most part, one-half or more of the total variance. Part 

of the variance at this level is caused by error due to 

laboratory procedures (sample preparation and 

analysis), but because these effects tend to be small 

(table 4) most of the variance can be attributed to 

natural causes (that is, to actual small-scale variation 

within the soil). 

Although statistically significant variation occurs 

between quadrangles within vegetation-type areas, it 

is commonly only a small part of the total variance. In 

summary, the major sources of compositional 

variability in the uncultivated soils are found between 

vegetation-type areas and, locally, between samples 

collected within 71

12-minute quadrangles. 

Results of the chemical analyses of the uncultivated 

soils from the six vegetation-type areas that were 

sampled in Missouri are summarized in table 6. The 

geometric mean (GM) for each vegetation-type area 

represents the most probable concentration of the 

element in a randomly selected sample from an area. 

In those cases where the detection ratio does not equal 

unity, the mean logarithms were computed using 

procedures developed by Cohen (1959) and described 

as they were applied to the Missouri geochemical 

studies by Miesch (1976). The geometric deviation 

( GD) is a measure of the variation of the data about 

this central tendency. For example, a GD near 1.0 

indicates virtually no variability of that element in the 

soil material that was analyzed. 

As discussed in the sampling design section of this 

report, the stability of the areal means for the 

elements listed in table 6 for which statistically 

significant differences were found between soils from 

vegetation-type areas may be assessed by Vm 

(equation 7). E8 for stage lb sampling is derived from 

E8=s J /lO+s; /50, (9) 

where s ~ and s J are the variance components 

estimated between sites and between quadrangles, 

rspectively (table 5). In table 7, the generally large 

values of the stability index, vm (see equation 7), all 

(except for lead) of which are greater than the 

corresponding critical vm, indicate that the stage lb 

data are sufficient for distinguishing, at the 95-percent 

confidence level, the chemical characteristics of the 

soils between the major regions of the State. 

Considerable variation between the vegetation-type 

areas in the concentrations of chemical constituents in 

the uncultivated soils is apparent in table 6. For all 

constituents tested, at least the highest and lowest 

means are significantly different at the 0.05 

probability level. Relatively high concentrations of 

many elements occur in soils from the Glaciated 

Prairie, the Unglaciated Prairie, and the Cedar 

Glades, and the lowest concentrations of many 

elements occur in soils from the Oak-hickory-pine 

Forest vegetation-type area. 

Basically, the analysis of variance (table 5) assures 

us that significant differences in concentrations of the 

elements and pH occur at the very least between the 

two vegetation types that have the extreme mean 

TABLE 1.-Statistics used to assess adequacy of stage lb sampling for distinguishing vegetation-type areas, based on soil analyses 

Element, Element, or pH ~ (orNv) Es Vm vm(0.95) or pH sJ (or Nv) Es Vm Vm(0.95) 

AI ......... 0.02730 0.00080 34.0 6.1 Mg ........ 0.10137 0.00283 35.9 5.6 As ........ .01115 .00171 6.5 3.4 Mn ........ .01532 .00361 4.2 3.2 

B .......... .00264 .00058 4.6 3.4 Na ........ .06442 .00267 24.1 5.6 

Ba ......... .02118 .00226 9.4 4.0 Ni ......... .02861 .00264 10.8 3.7 

C, carbonate .12758 .00730 17.5 3.5 P .......... .03289 .00163 20.2 4.2 

C, organic .. .04500 .00132 34.1 4.7 Ph ........ .00255 .00092 2.8 3.0 

Ca ......... .20049 .00493 40.6 5.8 Sc ......... .02064 .00115 18.0 4.6 

Co ......... .00439 .00141 3.1 2.9 Se ......... .03312 .00279 11.9 3.5 

Cr ......... .01721 .00106 16.2 3.9 Si ........ 77.038 2.0259 38.0 4.4 

Cu ........ .00908 .00217 4.2 2.9 Sr ......... .03050 .00167 18.3 4.9 

F .......... .03356 .00300 11.2 3.7 Ti ......... .01238 .00087 14.3 3.8 

Fe ......... .02239 .00086 26.1 4.5 v ......... .02866 .00137 20.9 4.4 

Ga ........ .02820 .00135 20.9 4.3 y ......... .00601 .00157 3.8 3.2 

Hg ........ .03720 .00215 17.3 3.8 Yb ........ .00644 .00132 4.9 3.3 

K ......... .01164 .00169 6.9 3.7 Zn ......... .01559 .00138 11.3 3.2 

La ......... .00411 .00052 7.8 3.4 Zr ......... .02550 .00185 13.8 4.1 

Li ......... .01514 .00081 18.8 4.5 pH ....... .58844 .00968 60.8 6.5 

1 Variance components derived from nontransformed data. 

2 Variance components expressed in standard units. 
COMPOSITION OF PLANTS AND SOILS FROM MAJOR VEGETATION-TYPE AREAS C17 

values. In order to depict these differences on maps, a 

judgment is needed as to whether the six areal means 

can be naturally grouped into some smaller subsets. 

For making this judgment we relied on results of 

Duncan's multiple range test (Duncan, 1955), the 

application of which was more fully described by 

Miesch (1976). An example of the application and 

interpretation of this test follows. 

For an element-in this example, zinc-the 

vegetation-type areas are ranked by geometric mean 

concentrations in the uncultivated soils (table 6) as 

follows: 

Vegetation-type area Geometric mean, (in ppm) 

Glaciated Prairie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........ 67] 

Floodplain Forest ................................ 54 J 

Cedar Glade ..................................... 54 

Unglaciated Prairie ............................... 51 

Oak-hickory Forest ............................... 36] Oak-hickory-pine-Forest .......................... 30 

On the basis of the multiple range test, which 

provides a measure of the SSR (shortest significant 

range or difference) between means, the bracketed 

means shown above cannot be demonstrated to be 

significantly different at the 0.05 level of probability. 

Only one clear discontinuity can be identified in the 

ranked means; it occurs between the Unglaciated 

Prairie and the Oak-hickory Forest and the 

Oak-hickory-pine Forest. Therefore, the six vegetation-type areas may be unequivocally classified into 

two groups with respect to zinc concentrations in the 

soils. One of these groups, relatively high in zinc, is 

formed by the Glaciated Prairie, the Floodpain Forest, 

the Cedar Glade, and the Unglaciated Prairie. The 

other group, relatively low in zinc, is formed by the 

Oak-hickory Forest and the Oak-hickory-pine Forest. 

The vegetation-type areas are classified in this 

manner in figures 10-43. Thus zinc (fig. 41), for 

example, tends on a broad scale to be about equally 

abundant in the prairie soils in the northern and 

western parts of the State and in the soils of the 

Cedar Glade and Floodplain Forest areas. The 

geometric mean zinc concentration for this entire area 

is given as 61 ppm. It is computed as the weighted 

arithmetic average of the four geometric means for 

the individual vegetation-type areas making up the 

group. Each areal mean was weighted by the size of 

the area it represents. As is also shown in figure 41, 

the mean zinc concentration of soils in the Oak-hickory 

and Oak-hickory-pine forested areas is about one-half 

that of the other four areas-about 36 ppm. 

These maps present the very broad or statewide 

features of the element distribution patterns at a 

glance. Also included on the maps are histograms 

representing the frequency distributions of analytical 

values for each of the six vegetation-type area soils, 

the geometric mean ( GM) and geometric deviation 

(GD) for each group, and the locations of the randomly 

selected quadrangles that were sampled. These 

locations are indicated by numbers representing the 

average compositions of the soil samples from each 

quadrangle. 

Certain limitations should be observed in 

interpreting the data presented in figures 10- 43. For 

example, the zinc map shows only that the soils from 

the Oak-hickory Forest and Oak-hickory-pine Forest 

areas tend to contain less zinc than do soils elsewhere 

in the State. This tendency does not mean that all soils 

in these upland forested areas contain less zinc than do 

soils in other vegetation-type areas, as can be seen by 

examining the histograms on the figures. The few 

highest samples from the Oak-hickory Forest are 

higher than any from the Unglaciated Prairie, and the 

analysis of variance (table 5) demonstrated that more 

than baH of the total variance occurs at local scales or 

in laboratory procedures. These facts are not evident 

in the quadrangle means plotted on the maps because 

the natural local variability has been smoothed out and 

largely obscured by computing these means. 

The principal value of these maps is their usefulness 

in presenting a quantitive first-order description of 

the chemistry of uncultivated B-horizon soils in 

Missouri. Local areas of the State which for one reason 

or another may be suspected of having· atypical soils 

can now be assessed in a quantitive way by reference 

to these maps. In determining if the concentration of 

an element in soil from such an area is anomalous, the 

GM and the GD for the element and vegetation-type 

area from which the samples were taken are the 

proper statistics to compare with data provided by 

these maps. (See Miesch, 1976.) 

Some of the map patterns in figures 10 - 43 are 

based on distinctions in soil chemistry among all six 

vegetation-type areas. Other patterns are based on 

distinctions between two or more groupings of these 

areas if Duncan's (1955) multiple range test indicated 

the presence of distinct groupings. Maps for nine 

elements (barium, boron, copper, lanthanum, lead, 

potassium, silicon, ytterbium, and yttrium), however, 

contain only three rather arbitrary groupings. For 

these elements, the analysis of variance indicated 

that at least the highest and lowest areas are distinct 

from each other, but Duncan's test failed to 

unambiguously define any groups. For these 

elements, we conclude only that the areas of extreme 

high and extreme low mean concentrations are 

significantly different. 
C18 GEOCHEMICAL SURVEY OF MISSOURI 

Six principal distinctive geochemical patterns in 

uncultivated soils from Missouri are summarized in 

table 8. 

Soils from the two prairie areas cannot be 

distinguished by their concentrations of chromium, 

lithium, scandium, selenium, and vanadium. However, 

the two prairie areas do differ in that the Glaciated 

Prairie soils tend to be higher in aluminum, calcium 

gallium, and magnesium content, whereas the 

Unglaciated Prairie soils tend to have greater 

concentrations of cobalt and manganese. These 

differences justify our decision, made at the beginning 

of the study, to divide Kuchler's (1964) prairie-mosaic 

type (which was established on the basis of plant 

species composition) into glaciated and unglaciated 

areas for conducting geochemical studies of soils and 

vegetation. 

The Cedar Glade soils are distinct from soils of the 

other vegetation-type areas in Missouri in that they 

have a significantly higher pH, and their 

concentrations of calcium, carbonate and organic 

carbon, mercury, and magnesium are also significantly higher. On the other hand, these soils tend to 

have the lowest concentrations of sodium, titanium, 

and zirconium. The high concentrations of organic 

carbon and mercury (figs. 16 and 28) suggest that 

organic materials in soils of this area may serve as a 

sink for mercury moving through the environment, 

and corroborates reports in the literature (for 

example, Shacklette, Boerngen, and Turner, 1971, p. 

3) that organic materials tend to "scavenge" mercury. 

The evidence that Missouri soils outside the Cedar 

Glade area compose a single population based on their 

mercury concentrations is supported by results of 

two programs of sampling the State's agricultural soils 

(U.S. Geological Survey, 1972f, p. 42; Erdman and 

others, 1976). These studies indicated that mercury 

concentrations in cultivated soils vary locally, but not 

regionally. (Cedar Glade soils were not sampled in the 

studies.) Moreover, the mercury content of these 

agricultural soils-39 ppb (parts per billion) and 42 

ppb, respectively-is in reasonable accord with the 55 

ppb that we estimated for uncultivated soils from 

outside the Cedar Glade area (fig. 28). 

Some unusually high values for arsenic and 

molybdenum were found in samples of uncultivated 

soils from Howell County, south-central Missouri 

(figs. 2 and 3). The average arsenic concentration in 

five samples collected in the Pottersville area (Cureall 

quadrangle) is 26 ppm, a concentration considerably 

greater than those of other quadrangle averages (fig. 

11). These five samples contained 59, 51, 28, 21, and 7 

ppm arsenic. With but one exception, these values 

greatly exceed the 8 ppm characteristic of soils from 

that general area (the Oak-hickory Forest). The two 

samples from the Cureall quadrangle with the highest 

arsenic concentrations also have high molybdenum 

levels, 30 and 7 ppm, and are the only soil samples 

collected in the Oak-hickory Forest area that were 

found to contain molybdenum in detectable 

concentrations. 

The Pottersville area must be judged anomalous in 

TABLE B.-Geographic patterns of variation in chemical elements and pH of uncultivated soils from Missouri 

[Patterns based on results of the analysis of variance and a multiple range test (Duncan, 1955) I 

Geographic 

pattern 

No. 

Vegetation type or types Variation in chemical elements and pH 

1 ............... Glaciated Prairie and Unglaciated Prairie~. . . . . . . . . . . . Highest in arsenic, chromium, iron, scandium, selenium, and vanadium. 

2 ............... Glaciated Prairie and Unglaciated Prairie~. . . . . . . . . . . . Aluminum, calcium, gallium, and magnesium higher in 

Glaciated Prairie; cobalt and manganese higher in 

Unglaciated Prairie. 

3 ............... Oak-hickory Forest and Oak-hickory-pine Forest 1

. . . . . . Lowest in nickel, scandium, and zinc. 

4 ............... Oak-hickory-pine Forest 1_ . . • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • • . . • • • • • • Lowest in aluminum, calcium, chromium, iron, gallium, 

lithium, magnesium, strontium, and vanadium; and 

low in sodium. 

5 ............... Cedar Glade 1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Highest in calcium, total carbon, carbonate carbon, 

organic carbon, magnesium, mercury, and pH; lowest 

in sodium, titanium, and zirconium. 

6 ............... Floodplain Forest and Cedar Glade 1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Higher in phosphorus. 

1 Distinctive from other vegetation-type areas. 

2 Distinctive from each other. 
COMPOSITION OF PLANTS AND SOILS FROM MAJOR VEGETATION-TYPE AREAS C19 

these aspects of its soil chemistry, but because 

cursory examination of the area revealed nothing 

obviously unusual about the local landscape, we have 

included arsenic and molybdenum data for the 

Pottersville soil samples as part of our summaries in 

table 6 and map figure 11. 

In summary, the geochemical data presented in 

table 6 and figures 10 - 43 reveal a major pattern or 

trend of generally high concentrations of the elements 

that were studied in soils from the prairie 

vegetation-type areas which compose a region 

underlain largely by rocks of Pennsylvanian age and 

by glacial deposits, and of low concentrations in soils 

from forests of the Ozark uplands, especially in those 

from the vegetation-type area characterized by the 

presence of pine trees. Our decision to recognize the 

Glaciated Prairie and the Unglaciated Prairie as 

distinct vegetation-type areas for the purpose of 

geochemical studies seems to have been justified, as is 

shown by the differences in concentration of certain 

elements in the soils. Some of these chemical 

differences may reflect time differences in the effects 

of weathering on the two groups of soils, the 

unglaciated soils having had the longer period of 

weathering. Samples of soils from the Cedar Glade 

area are distinctly different in concentration of certain 

elements from soils sampled in other vegetation-type 

areas and reflect, in part, the strong influence of the 

carbonate parent materials (dolomite and limestone) 

of soils in this area. 

Q-MODE FACTOR ANALYSIS 

The distribution patterns in concentrations of many 

elements in the uncultivated soils of the State are 

similar (figs. 10 -43). These patterns indicate that 

concentrations of the elements are not independent of 

each other and that the total chemical composition of 

the soil at any one locality might be resolved into some 

minimum number of more fundamental compositional 

variables or factors. To this end, the data from the 

stage 1b sampling were analyzed using procedures of 

Q-mode factor analysis as described by Miesch (1976). 

The factor analysis procedure began with the 

conversion of all of the element data for each sample to 

percentages of the common oxides, except for 

fluorine, mercury, and organic carbon. These data 

were adjusted so that they summed to exactly 100 

percent for each sample. Each chemical variable was 

then scaled to range from zero to one, and this 

transformed data matrix was normalized by dividing 

each row by the square root of the row sum of 

squares (Miesch, 1976). Finally, from the normalized 

data matrix we effectively computed a matrix of 

proportional similarity coefficients, cos 9 (Klovan and 

Imbrie, 1971). The first 10 eigenvalues of this matrix 

and the corresponding percentages of the total 

variance that they represent are as follows: 

Cumulative 

Eigenvalue percentage 

244.0 ...... 81.6 

20.2 ...... 88.3 

9.3 ...... 91.5 

8.1 ...... 94.2 

5.0 ...... 95.9 

Eigenvalue 

Cumulative 

percentage 

1.9 ........ 96.9 

1.6 ........ 97.1 

1.4 ........ 97.6 

1.3 ........ 98.1 

1.2 ........ 98.5 

These values indicate that 94 percent of the variability 

in the normalized data matrix can be represented in 

terms of four theoretical factors of some kind. 

However, as pointed out by Miesch ( 1976), the 

eigenvalues give no information about the degree to 

which a factor model will account for the variability in 

the original data in units of percent. For this purpose, 

a factor-variance diagram was constructed using the 

coefficients of determination derived by comparison of 

the original data with the data reproduced from factor 

models containing 2 to 10 factors (Miesch, 1976). The 

diagram showed that 14 of the 32 chemical 

constituents included were not being closely 

accounted for by any of the models containing up to 10 

factors; 4-factor models accounted for less than 

one-half of their variances. The 14 constituents, in 

general, were those which display little variance 

between vegetation-type areas (As, B, organic C, Co, 

Cu, F, Hg, K, La, Mn, Ni, Pb, Se, and Y, table 5). 

Accordingly, these constituents were excluded from 

further computations. The factor-variance diagram 

was reconstructed using the remaining 18 constituents 

and is shown in figure 44. The diagram indicates that a 

Q-mode model containing four factors will account for 

about one-baH or more of the variance in the original 

percentage data for each of the 18 constituents 

included. The inclusion of a fifth or additional factor 

would not lead to a significantly better model. 

Composition loadings and composition scores were 

determined for the V arimax Q-mode model using the 

procedures outlined by Miesch (1976). This model has 

the form: 

where Xij is an approximation of the percentage 

concentration of the jth chemical constituent in the ith 

sample, the a's are composition loadings, and the fs 

are composition scores. The four composition loadings 

sum to unity for each sample and are of primary 

interest because each represents the proportion of an 

end-member "sample" or the importance of an 

end-member factor in the model. 

The factor scores for the V arimax model are given 

in table 9. The computation procedure used in their 
C20 GEOCHEMICAL SURVEY OF MISSOURI 

TABLE 9.-Composition scores for the Varimax Q-mode model derivation leads to a set of scores that sums to 100 for 

each factor. Because of the large positive scores for 

Si02, C02, and CaO on factor 1 if 1j, table 9), most of 

the remaining scores on this factor are negative. 

Moreover, as will be shown, all of the sample 

composition loadings on factor 1 are also negative. 

describing compositional variations in the uncultivated soils from 

Missouri 

Chemical 

variable hi 

Al201 .............. -142.8 

BaO ................ -.797 

CO 2(in carbonate) ... 63.8 

CaO ................ 45.6 

Cr203 .............. -.137 

Fe203 .............. -74.3 

Ga20 3 .............. -.0363 

Li20 ............... -.0896 

MgO ............... 12.1 

Na20 -6.07 

P20s.:::::::::::::: .988 

Si02 ................ 211 

SrO ................ -.142 

Ti02 ............... -8.22 

V203 ............... -.254 

Yb203 .............. -.0050 

ZnO ................ -.0827 

Zr02 ............... -.374 

Composition scores 

hj laj 

-0.1 5.4 

.010 -.018 

-1.4 18.9 

-1.9 16.6 

.003 .004 

1.3 2.5 

-.0002 .0015 

.0015 .0052 

-.7 7.1 

-.10 -.32 

.022 .430 

102 50 

-.002 .008 

.54 -.28 

0 .008 

.0003 0 

0 .0127 

.049 -.034 

141 

4.1 

.248 

-4.0 

-1.3 

-.014 

-11.0 

-.0011 

-.0113 

-1.1 

5.36 

.464 

108 

.055 

-.56 

-.020 

-.0004 

-.0005 

-.040 

It is apparent from these scores that samples having 

large negative composition loadings on factor 1 are 

alumina-rich in comparison with other samples, and 

that samples having large positive loadings on factor 2 

tend to be rich in silica and other constituents of 

resistate minerals, including titanium and zirconium, 

but in little else. Similarly, samples with large positive. 

loadings on factor 3 tend to be relatively rich in 

carbonate minerals, and those with large positive 

loadings on factor 4 tend to be rich in sodium, alumina, 

and silica, and probably are feldspathic. These 

loadings for each sample are given to one significant 

figure in figures 45- 48, and, as indicated by equation 

10, when .multiplied by the corrresponding scores in 

table 9 provide approximations of the original data. 

TABLE 10.-Chemical composition and mineralogy of soil samples with first and second highest absolute loadings on each of four factors 1,''n 

the factor model 

Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Factor 4 

Constituent Sample No. Sample No. Sample No. Sample No. 

U6 U22 U49 U38 C16 C37 D15 D32 

Chemieal composition 

(Concentrations in parts per million, except as indicated) 

Al, percent .................. 9 6 3 3 2 2 3 3 

Ba 500 700 500 200 100 150 300 700 

C, c~~b~~~i~; p~~~~~t::::::::: <.01 .12 .08 <.01 9.12 6.40 .06 .01 

Ca, percent .................. .2 .6 .1 .1 30 11 .6 .6 

Cr .......................... 70 100 30 50 20 20 7 15 

Fe, percent .................. 6.4 4.2 1.4 2.4 .8 1.1 .8 1.0 

Ga •••••••••• ' ••••••••••••• 0 30 30 7 7 7 5 5 10 

Li .......................... 66 37 18 19 7 13 8 8 

Mg, percent ................. .78 .60 .16 .15 .50 6.03 .15 .17 

Na, percent ................. .39 .59 .16 .27 .06 .11 1.0 .96 

P, percent ................... .03 .04 .01 .02 .08 .14 .04 .07 

Si, percent .................. 26 29 39 40 7 14 40 41 

Sr .......................... 150 100 70 50 150 100 100 150 

Ti, percent .................. .5 .5 .7 .5 .15 .07 .1 .15 

v · .......................... 150 150 70 70 30 30 20 20 

Yb ......................... 3 5 3 3 2 1 <1 1 

Zn 0 •••••••••• 0 0. 0. 0 •••••••• 61 63 22 29 31 34 20 23 

Mineralogy 

[Reduced to percentage of four major mineral groups; relative background is proportional to total iron content) 

Quartz ...................... 30 35 70 85 10 20 70 65 

Clay minerals ................ 65 60 25 <10 10 15 <10 15 

Feldspars ................... 5 5 5 10 0 1 20 15 

Carbonates .................. 0 0 0 0 80 65 0 5 

Relative background •• 0 ••• 0 •• 9.5 8 6 6.5 4 5.5 5 5.5 
COMPOSITION OF PLANTS AND SOILS FROM MAJOR VEGETATION-TYPE AREAS C21 

We have used the Q-mode analysis as a device for 

summarizing a complex set of multivariate data, This 

analysis leads us to conclude that variation in four 

factors can explain, to a great extent, the variation in 

the concentrations of the 18 elements in the soils that 

exhibit generally a high degree of variation across the 

State. What these factors may have been is a matter 

of interpretation; the main bases for our interpretation are the nature of the composition scores and the 

geographic variations in magnitudes of the 

composition loadings for each sample on each factor. 

All four factors may be interpreted as reflecting the 

contributions of geologic parent materials to soils. The 

first factor (fig. 45) appears to reflect an 

aluminum-rich parent because samples with high 

negative loadings on this factor come from areas 

known to contain aluminum-rich parent rocks. 

Alternatively, this factor could represent maximum 

TABLE H.-Components of logarithmic variance estimated for samples of sumac stems collected in 

sampling stages 1a and 1 b from six vegetation-type areas in Missouri 

[First and second lines of data following each element give components derived from sta~es la and lb sampling, respectively. Asterisk 

(*), significantly greater than zero at the 0.05 probability level. Leaders ( ... )in igure columns indicate no data available] 

Variance 

Between areas Between quadrangles Between sites 

Ash, or Total 

element loglO Component, Percent of Component, Percent of Component, Percent of 

variance 8'2 total s~ total s2 a total 'Y 

Ash .......... 

0.00637 *0.00102 16 0.00014 2 0.00521 82 

AI. ........... .04251 0 <1 0 <1 .04251 100 

.11228 0 <1 .00636 6 .01592 94 

B ............ .01331 0 <1 0 <1 .01331 100 

.01753 .00037 2 0 <1 .01716 98 

Ba ........... .24802 *.14120 57 .02894 12 .07788 31 

.28873 *.19700 68 *.02281 8 .06892 24 

Ca ........... 

.00496 *.00087 17 0 <1 .00410 83 

Cd ........... 

.08319 *.02154 26 *.01736 21 .04430 53 

Cr ........... .09470 .00124 1 .00659 7 .08687 92 

Cu ........... .03294 *.00965 29 .00614 19 .01705 52 

.02851 .00076 3 .00127 4 .02648 93 

Fe ........... .03513 *.00735 21 0 <1 .02778 79 

.05992 .00078 1 .00341 6 .05572 93 

K ............ 

.10272 *.00204 16 0 <1 .01068 84 

Mg ........... .02977 *.00667 22 .00219 7 .02091 70 

.03489 *.00265 7 .00176 5 .03048 87 

Mn ........... .07130 *.02028 28 *.02703 38 .02399 34 

.05213 *.00557 11 *.00511 10 .04145 76 

Na ........... 

.04729 *.00221 5 .00110 2 .04399 93 

Ni ............ 

.22870 *.11777 51 *.01397 6 .09696 42 

P ............ 

.02357 *.01008 43 .00034 1 .01315 56 

Pb ........... .05742 .00791 14 .00131 2 .04820 84 

.10481 *.01267 12 *.01796 17 .07417 71 

Se ........... 

.08687 *.03990 46 .00299 3 .04399 51 

Sr ............ .12891 *.07927 61 .00058 <1 .04906 38 

.19599 *.13730 70 *.00671 3 .05198 27 

Ti ............ .08968 0 <1 0 <1 .08968 100 

.14279 *.00592 7 *.01468 10 .11860 83 

Zn ........... 

.04172 *.00943 23 .00043 1 .03186 76 
C22 GEOCHEMICAL SURVEY OF MISSOURI 

B-"horizon development-that is, the accumulation of 

clay minerals and the consequent increase of alumina 

and most other constituents compared to silica and 

carbonate minerals. According to the classical theory 

of soil genesis, the accumulation of clays and trace 

metals in this horizon results from the solubilization 

and movement of alumina from the A horizon and its 

deposition in the B horizon. 

The second factor (fig. 46) seems to represent highly 

weathered silica-rich regoliths developed from a 

cherty residuum. This development occurs most 

commonly in the southern upland forests, even though 

several of the samples with the highest loadings on 

this factor were collected in the area mapped as 

Unglaciated Prairie vegetation-type area. The 

chemical data for many of the samples from the 

71

/z-minute quadrangles in the southernmost part of 

this prairie type suggest, however, that we had 

collected the samples in a zone that is transitional 

between the prairie and the upland forests of the 

State. 

The lithosols from the Cedar Glades in the 

south-central part of Missouri form a distinct group 

and are thought to be reflected by the third factor of 

the Varimax model (fig. 47). Soils of the Cedar Glade 

area are slightly alkaline, rich in organic material, and 

high in calcium-magnesium carbonate content which 

reflects the dolomitic soil parent that crops out 

abundantly in the area. 

The fourth factor of the Varimax model (fig. 48) is 

interpreted to represent a feldspathic sand facies of 

the Mississippi River floodplain alluvium. These light 

soils (apparently, minor variants of the Floodplain 

Forest soils) are in strong contrast to the more 

representative heavy clayey soils more typically 

associated with the alluvial region. 

The mineralogy and elemental chemical compositions of the two soil samples that have the highest 

loadings on each of the theoretical factors of the 

V arimax model are given in table 10. 

The effects of alumina-rich parent materials (factor 

1), as reflected in the mineralogy of samples U6 and 

U22 (table 10), are indicated by a relatively low quartz 

and carbonate mineral content and corresponding high 

concentrations of the clay minerals. The quartz parent 

(factor 2) is evident in the mineralogy of samples U49 

and U38, as is the carbonate parent (factor 3) in 

samples C16 and C37. The importance of feldspars in 

the last type of parent material (factor 4) is clear from 

the mineralogy of the Floodplain Forest samples D15 

and D32. 

TABLE 12. -Components of logarithmic variance estimated for buckbusk from five vegetation-type areas ,;'n Missouri 

(Asterisk(*), significantly greater than zero at the 0.05 probability level] 

Between areas Between quadrangles Between sites 

Total 

Ash, or log 10 Component, Percent Component, Percent Component, Percent 

Element variance s2 of total sa of total ~ of total a 

Ash .......... 0.00588 *0.00029 5 *0.00077 13 0.00482 82 

AI ............ .02352 *.00223 9 *.00209 9 .01920 82 

B ............ .01564 0 <1 .0074 5 .01491 95 

Ba ........... .09737 *.04896 50 *.01393 14 .03448 35 

Ca ........... .00639 *.00116 18 .00040 6 .00483 76 

Cd ........... .08621 *.02013 23 *.01269 15 .05339 62 

Co ........... .04581 .00109 2 .00167 4 .04305 94 

Cr ........... .03952 *.00458 12 *.00406 10 .03088 78 

Cu ........... .02805 *.00154 5 .00041 1 .02610 93 

Fe ........... .05707 * .00688 12 *.00776 14 .04243 74 

K ............ .00547 .00003 <1 *.00091 17 .00453 83 

Li ............ .02119 *.00184 9 .00087 4 .01847 87 

Mg ........... .04117 * .00264 6 .00041 1 .03812 93 

Mn ........... .08299 *.02380 29 .00470 6 .05450 66 

Na ........... .01994 *.00520 26 *.00185 9 .01290 65 

Ni ............ .03906 *.00727 19 .00116 3 .03064 78 

P ............ .02094 *.00667 32 .00095 5 .01332 64 

Pb ........... .08571 *.01294 15 *.01703 20 .05574 65 

Se ........... .03596 *.01067 30 *.00074 2 .02455 68 

Sr ............ .14452 *.09905 69 *.00768 5 .03779 26 

Ti. ........... .06022 *.00762 13 *.00211 4 .05048 84 

v ............ .04188 * .00697 17 *.00301 7 .03191 76 

Zn ........... .03765 *.00305 8 *.00919 24 .02541 67 

Zr ............ .09196 *.01057 11 *.00718 8 .07421 81 
COMPOSITION OF PLANTS AND SOILS FROM MAJOR VEGETATION-TYPE AREAS C23 

TABLE 13.-Components of logarithmic variance estimated for white oak from the Oak-hickory Forest and the Oak-hickorypine Forest areas in Missouri 

[Asterisk(*), significantly greater than zero at the 0.05 probability level) 

Between areas Between quadrangles Between sites 

Total 

Element, Component, Percent of Component, Percent of logw Component, Percent of 

or ash variance ~ total ~ total 

AI. ........... 0.04174 0 <1 

B ............ .01893 0 <1 

Ba ........... .03428 .00167 5 

Ca ........... .00092 0 <1 

Cd ........... .02314 0 <1 

Co ........... .25501 .01098 4 

Cr ........... .08416 0 <1 

Cu ........... .02461 0 <1 

Fe ........... .05029 0 <1 K ............ .01003 0 <1 

Mg ........... .05356 0 <1 

Mn ........... .04975 .00052 1 

Na ........... .01492 .00083 6 

Ni ............ .05580 0 <1 

P ............ .02138 .00112 5 

Pb ........... .07155 .00656 9 

Se ........... .02657 0 <1 

Sr ............ .06203 .00356 6 

Ti ............ .05068 0 <1 

Zn ........... .01718 .00015 1 

Ash .......... .00785 .00017 2 

TABLE ~4.-Sta_tis.tics. u~ed to assess adequacy of stage 1b 

samplmg for dlstmgulshmg vegetation-type areas on the basis of plant analyses 

[Leaders ( .. ) in figure columns indicate significant difference between areas were not demonstrated] 

Plant species 

Element ______ s_um_a_c____ Buck bush 

s~ (or Nvl Es Vm Vm(0.95) s~_(or Nv) E8 Vm Vm(0.95) 

AI 

Ba 

Ca. 

Cd 

Cr. 

Cu 

Fe 

K. 

Li ... 

Mg 

Mn 

Na. 

Ni.. 

p 

Pb .. 

Se. 

Sr 

Ti 

V .. . Zn ..... . Zr ...... . 

0.19700 0.00366 53.8 

.00087 .00008 10.9 

.02154 .00262 8.2 

.00204 

.00265 

.00557 

.00221 

.11777 

.Q1008 

.01267 

.03990 

.13730 

.00952 

.00943 

.00021 9.7 

.00079 3.4 

.00134 4.2 

.00099 2.2 

.00334 35.3 

.00030 33.6 

.00328 3.9 

.00118 33.8 

.00171 80.3 

.00384 2.5 

.00068 13.9 

8.6 

3.4 

3.8 

3.2 

2.9 

3.0 

2.8 

5.3 

4.5 

3.0 

5.1 

7.0 

3.0 

3.5 

0.00223 0.00059 3.8 3.1 

.04896 .00208 23.5 5.1 

.00116 .00014 8.3 3.3 

.02013 .00234 8.6 3.7 

.00458 .00102 4.5 2.9 

.00154 

.00688 

.00184 

.00264 

.02380 

.00520 

.00727 

.00667 

.01294 

.01067 

.09905 

.00762 

.00697 

.00305 

.01057 

.00056 

.00163 

.00046 

.00084 

.00137 

.00044 

.00073 

.00036 

.00282 

.00057 

.00152 

.00122 

.00094 

.00143 

.00220 

2.8 

4.2 

4.0 

3.1 

17.4 

18.2 

10.0 

18.5 

4.6 

18.7 

65.2 

6.2 

7.4 

2.1 

4.8 

2.6 

2.9 

2.9 

2.4 

4.0 

3.5 

3.2 

3.7 

3.2 

3.8 

8.7 

3.2 

3.2 

2.8 

2.9 

The differences in the chemical compositions among 

the soil samples just described (table 10) are in accord 

with the differences among their mineralogical 

compositions. Samples U6 and U22 from the 

Unglaciated Prairie are thought to reflect the 

influence of alumina-rich parent materials (factor 1). 

s! total 

0 <1 0.04174 100 

.00117 6 .01775 94 

.00494 14 .02767 81 

0 <1 .00092 100 

.00244 11 .02070 89 

.00321 1 .24082 94 

0 <1 .08416 100 

*.00472 19 .01988 81 

.00399 8 .04630 92 

.00069 7 .00934 93 

*.01738 32 .03618 68 

0 <1 .04923 99 

.00028 2 .01381 92 

.00692 12 .04888 88 

.00032 2 .01993 93 

*.01920 27 .04579 64 

.00162 6 .02495 94 

*.00862 14 .04985 80 

.00107 2 .04961 98 

.00135 8 .01567 91 

*.00190 24 .00576 73 

Aluminum, iron, and many of the trace elements 

(barium, chromium, gallium, lithium, vanadium, 

ytterbium, and zinc) are highly concentrated in these 

soils. Samples U49 and U38 from the southernmost 

part of the Unglaciated Prairie, where sandstone 

outcrops are common, reflect a soil parent material 

rich in silicon, titanium, and zirconium (factor 2). 

The two kinds of carbonate parent materials common 

to the Cedar Glades-limestone and dolomite-are 

reflected in samples C16 and C37, respectively (factor 

3). In addition to the high concentrations of carbonate 

carbon, calcium, and magnesium (in sample C37, 

likely derived from dolomite), phosphorus appears to 

be fairly abundant in soils from the glades. Finally, 

samples D15 and D32 from the Floodplain Forest 

represent a variant of the typically clayey alluvial soils 

(factor 4) that is characteristically high in silicon and 

sodium. Sodium seems to be the principal element that 

distinguishes this factor from the others, particularly 

from factor 2. 

CHEMICAL COMPOSITION AND VARIABILITY OF 

SELECTED NATIVE PLANTS 

Although a large part of the stage 1b sampling of 

plants was directed toward a description of regional 
C24 GEOCHEMICAL SURVEY OF MISSOURI 

geochemical patterns exhibited by two widely 

occurring shrubs, sumac and buckbush, studies were 

also made of seven tree species: white oak, post oak,· 

willow oak, sweetgum, shagbark hickory, cedar, and 

shortleaf pine. Stems or stems and leaves were 

collected, insofar as possible, at each of 5 sites in 10 

quadrangles, in the vegetation-type areas where the 

species are indigenous and, to some extent, 

characteristic. Sumac was collected in all six 

vegetation-type areas in the State. Buckbush was 

collected in five areas only, because of its scarcity in 

the Floodplain Forest area. White oak and shagbark 

hickory were collected only in the Oak-hickory Forest 

and the Oak-hickory-pine Forest areas. Cedar and 

post oak were collected in the Cedar Glade area, and 

willow oak and sweetgum only in the Floodplain 

Forest area. 

Of all species studied, only sumac was sampled in 

both stages 1a and 1b of the sampling plan. 

Estimated components of chemical variability in 

sumac, for the three geographic levels of the sampling 

design, are listed in table 11. A comparison of the 

estimated logarithmic variance components based on 

analyses of the sumac samples collected in both 1a and 

1b sampling stages indicates that these estimates are 

reasonably reproducible except those for copper and 

iron. Estimates between areas for these two elements 

differ by an order of magnitude. Because the stage 1b 

results are based on more intensive sampling than 

those of stage 1a, we accept the variance estimates 

from the 1b sampling as more valid. 

Geographic components of variance for stem ash of 

buckbush and white oak are listed in tables 12 and 13, 

respectively. Although a number of elements in stem 

ash exhibit significantly different mean concentrations 

between the vegetation-type areas in Missouri, the 

most important component for most elements is 

clearly the local one. This fact indicates that, 

compositionally, individuals of a single species 

growing within a few miles of each other (within the 

same 71/z-minute quadrangle) tend to be as chemically 

different as individuals growing at opposite sides of 

the State. 

The most notable exceptions to this local-variation 

tendency are barium, nickel, and strontium in stem 

ash of sumac, and barium and strontium in stem ash of 

buckbush, all of which exhibit more than half of their 

total variance at statewide scales (between 

vegetation-type areas). In addition to these elements, 

only cadmium, phosphorus, and selenium in sumac 

stem ash and manganese, phosphorus, selenium, and 

sodium in buckbush stem ash exhibit more than a 

fourth of their total variance between areas. No 

significant differences in elemental composition could 

be demonstrated in white oaks collected from the two 

upland forest areas. These results contrast sharply to 

TABLE 15.-Mean chemical composition and chemical variation in sumac stems from six vegetation-type areas in Missouri 

IGM. geometric mean, in parts per million; GD, geometric deviation; ratio, number of samples in which detected to total number of samples; leaders ( ... ) in figure colums, no data 

available. The highest and lowest mean concentrations of these elements, where tested and found to be significantly different at the 0.05 probability level, shown in boldface and 

italic, respectively. Because of insufficient data, differences in concentrations of Co, F, I, Li, Mo, and Zr were not tested) 

Vegetation type 

Floodplain Forest Glaciated Prairie Unglaciated Prairie Cedar Glade Oak-hickory Forest Oak-hickory-pine Forest 

Element, 

or ash GM GD Ratio GM GD Ratio GM GD Ratio GM GD Ratio GM GD Ratio GM GD Ratio 

AI. ........ 1,100 2.55 48:48 1,300 2.09 50:50 1,100 2.29 49:49 1,000 1.92 49:49 1,200 2.11 50:50 1,300 1.99 49:49 

B ......... 230 1.31 48:48 230 1.44 50:50 230 1.33 49:49 220 1.37 49:49 200 1.26 50:50 210 1.38 49:49 

Ba ........ 3,500 1.84 48:48 2,600 1.60 50:50 2,600 1.78 49:49 270 2.35 49:49 3,400 2.33 50:50 4,500 2.00 49:49 

Ca ........ 240,000 1.20 48:48 260,000 1.14 50:50 260,000 1.14 49:49 290,000 1.12 49:49 240,000 1.20 50:50 270,000 1.11 49:49 

Cd ........ 4.4 2.09 48:48 3.1 1.88 50:50 4.2 1.83 49:49 1.7 1.48 49:49 2.8 1.6.1 50:50 2.2 1.60 49:49 

Co ........ .75 2.80 23:48 .65 1.88 18:50 .78 2.10 23:49 .71 1.42 16:49 1.1 1.75 35:50 .97 2.17 30:49 

Cr ........ 3.3 3.28 37:48 2.6 1.96 40:50 2.5 2.16 36:49 2.2 2.05 31:49 2.7 1.95 40:50 3.1 1.87 43:49 

Cu ........ 110 1.40 48:48 110 1.41 50:50 100 1.46 49:49 86 1.58 49:49 89 1.43 50:50 97 1.51 49:49 

F ......... · .5 7:9 .5 5:8 .5 9:11 .76 1.67 10:11 .5 5:9 .5 5:8 

Fe ........ 1,100 1.98 48:48 1,300 1.52 50:50 1,300 1.74 49:49 1,000 1.68 49:49 1,100 1.89 50:50 1,200 1.66 49:49 

1 .......... 4.8 1.10 9:9 4.6 1.16 9:9 4.6 1.18 11:11 4.3 1.18 11:11 4.6 1.11 9:9 4.0 1.24 8:8 

K ......... 130,000 1.34 48:48 130,000 1.26 50:50 130,000 1.24 49:49 100,000 1.32 49:49 130,000 1.20 50:50 120,000 1.22 49:49 

Li. ........ <4 1:48 <4 0:50 <4 2:49 <4 0:48 <4 0:50 <4 1:49 

Mg ........ 29,000 1.48 48:48 22,000 1.54 50:50 23,000 1.40 49:49 22,000 1.69 49:49 20,000 1.43 50:50 20,000 1.50 49:49 Mo ........ .91 3.38 6:48 .76 4.27 7:50 <5 3:49 3.3 2.80 21:49 <5 3:50 <5 4:49 

Mn ........ 760 1.74 48:48 550 1.68 50:50 640 1.62 49:49 470 1.62 49:49 690 1.60 50:50 770 1.58 49:49 

Na ........ 310 1.64 48:48 250 1.60 50:50 220 1.88 49:49 230 1.60 48:48 230 1.46 50:50 280 1.57 49:49 

Ni. ........ 17 2.51 48:48 11 2.15 48:50 11 1.93 47:49 .81 3.56 13:49 4.0 2.82 36:50 3.9 2.68 ;)5:49 

P ......... 23,000 1.27 48:48 20,000 1.20 50:50 17,100 1.24 49:49 12,000 1.45 49:49 18,000 1.30 50:50 14,000 1.34 49:49 

Pb .. : . .... 26 2.28 34:48 32 1.82 42:50 28 2.11 38:49 42 2.17 43:49 30 2.36 37:50 61 2.23 46:49 

Se ........ .027 1.98 47:48 .022 1.83 49:50 .013 1.62 39:49 .01 25:48 .01 28:50 .01 34:49 

Sr ......... 3,400 1.62 48:48 3,500 1.49 50:50 3,700 1.46 49:49 400 1.72 49:49 2,700 2.19 50:50 3,100 1.79 49:49 

Ti ......... 98 2.54 48:48 120 1.65 50:50 120 1.99 49:49 94 1.77 49:49 130 2.15 50:50 170 1.89 49:49 

Zn ........ 770 1.63 48:48 860 1.44 50:50 820 1.42 49:49 520 1.59 49:49 660 1.41 50:50 500 1.56 49:49 

Zr ......... 4.1 3.49 6:48 <20 4:50 <20 4:49 <20 4:49 11 1.85 11:50 <20 13:49 

Ash ....... 35,000 1.19 48:48 42,000 1.19 50:50 38,000 1.18 49:49 36,000 1.18 49:49 36,000 1.18 50:50 94,000 1.18 49:49 
COMPOSITION OF PLANTS AND SOILS FROM MAJOR VEGETATION-TYPE AREAS C25 

TABLE 16.-Mean chemical composition and chemical variation in buckbush stems from five vegetation-type areas in Missouri 

[GM, geometric mean, in parts per million; GD, geometric deviation; ratio, number of samples in which detected to total number of samples; leaders ( ... ), no data available. The 

highest and lowest mean concentrations of these elements, where tested and found to be significantly different at the 0.05 probability level, are shown in boldface and italic, 

respectively. Because of insufficient data, differences in concentrations ofF, Ga, I, La, Mo, Y, ·and Yb were not tested) 

Vegetation type 

Glaciated Prairie Unglaciated Prairie Cedar Glade Oak-hickory Forest Oak-hickory-pine Forest 

Element, 

or ash GM GD Ratio GM GD Ratio GM 

AI. ........ 13,000 1.35 47:47 14,000 1.44 48:48 10,000 

B ......... 180 1.37 47:47 170 1.29 48:48 180 

Ba ........ 2,700 1.52 47:47 2,500 1.48 48:48 1,200 

Ca ........ 150,000 1.11 47:47 150,000 1.12 48:48 180,000 

Cd ........ 13 1.91 47:47 14 2.08 48:48 6.2 

Co ........ 4.0 1.43 47:47 4.8 1.76 47:48 4_4 

Cr ........ 20 1.52 47:47 22 1.49 48:48 14 

Cu ........ 190 1.61 47:47 200 1.46 48:48 160 

F ......... 1.6 1.49 11:11 1.4 2.56 3:3 1.1 

Fe ........ 7,600 1.74 47:47 9,300 1.64 48:48 5,600 

Ga ........ 2.8 1.54 11:47 2.4 1.73 9:48 <5 

I. ......... 4.7 1.11 11:11 5.4 1.10 7:7 4.7 

K ......... 160,000 1.15 47:47 160,000 1.16 48:48 150,000 

La ........ <70 0:47 <70 0:48 <70 

Li. ........ 5.3 1.37 42:47 5.2 1.38 41:46 4 

Mg ........ 35,000 1.56 47:47 38,000 1.51 48:48 47,000 

Mn .. 4,900 2.03 47:47 5,100 1.88 48:48 6,300 

Mo ........ 2.0 2.48 11:47 <5 4:48 6.5 

Na ........ 970 1.40 47:47 960 1.28 46:46 640 

Ni. ........ 12 1.51 47:47 12 1.49 48:48 7.5 

P ......... 26.000 1.30 47:47 24,000 1.40 48:48 17,000 

Ph ........ 200 1.76 47:47 210 1.91 48:48 310 Se ........ .043 1.45 47:47 .038 1.49 46:46 .023 

Sr ......... 1,800 1.43 47:47 1,700 1.46 48:48 340 Ti. ........ 980 1.57 47:47 1,200 1.76 48:48 710 

v ......... 22 1.48 47:47 23 1.55 48:48 14 ¥ ......... 17 1.16 14:47 16 1.28 17:48 <20 Yb ........ 1.6 1.18 11:47 1.7 1.21 18:48 <2 

Zn ........ 1,400 1.48 47:47 1,800 1.79 48:48 1,200 Zr ......... 69 1.78 47:47 85 1.71 48:48 44 Ash ....... 27,000 1.19 47:47 27,000 1.19 48:48 24,000 

those of a similar analysis of the uncultivated soils 

(table 5) in which 24 of 35 constituents exhibited more 

than a fourth of their total variance between 

vegetation-type areas. 

The relative stabilities of the means for those 

elements in tables 11 and 12 for which statistically 

significant differences between vegetation-type areas 

were found can be assessed by again using the relation 

in equation 7. The within-area mean variance (Es, 

equation 9) was again used to compute the stability 

index, v m • In spite of the small proportions of the 

total variance that tend to occur between 

vegetation-type areas, the generally large values of 

v min table 14, compared to the corresponding critical 

vm, indicate that, with the exception of sodium and 

titanium in sumac and of zinc in buckbush, the 

available data are sufficient to distinguish at the 

95-percent confidence level the major areas of the 

State classified by the elemental composition of sumac 

and buckbush stem ash. 

Results of the analyses of stem, or stem and leaf, 

material for nine species that were studied are 

summarized in tables 15-20. The geometric mean 

(GM) for each vegetation-type area represents the 

GD Ratio GM GD Ratio GM GD Ratio 

1.46 50:50 12,000 1.33 49:49 10,000 lAO 41:41 1.35 50:50 170 1.35 49:49 180 1.29 41:41 1.75 50:50 3,800 1.63 49:49 4,500 1.87 41:41 1.15 50:50 150,000 1.22 49:49 150,000 1.27 41:41 

1.43 50:50 12 1.69 49:49 12 1.86 41:41 

1.42 50:50 4.7 1.68 49:49 5.4 1.91 41:41 1.38 50:50 21 1.57 49:49 19 1.72 41:41 1.32 50:50 180 1.45 49:49 160 1.40 41:41 1.79 5:5 1.4 1.64 13:13 1.3 1.45 7:7 1.44 50:50 6,900 1.58 49:49 5,600 1.96 41:41 

2:50 2.7 1.51 9:49 1.5 2.24 5:41 1.16 8:8 5.1 1.13 16:16 4.6 1.16 10:10 

1.16 50:50 150,000 1.21 49:49 150,000 1.24 41:41 

1:50 34 1.48 5:49 43 1.39 8:41 31:47 4.5 1.43 34:46 4 26:39 

1.55 50:50 36,000 1.65 49:49 34,000 1.59 41:41 1.61 50:50 10,000 1.62 49:49 10.000 1.55 41:41 2.68 34:50 1.4 2.49 7:49 1.6 3.12 9:41 

1.27 47:47 820 1.36 44:44 770 1.27 39:39 

1.45 50:50 11 1.49 49:49 12 1.62 41:41 

1.28 50:50 21,000 1.27 49:49 17,000 1.32 41:41 1.85 50:50 260 1.88 49:49 420 1.84 41:41 1.33 49:49 .032 1.47 46:46 .031 1.47 39:39 1.52 50:50 1,500 1.96 49:49 1,500 1.72 41:41 1.51 50:50 1,200 1.73 49:49 1,000 1.91 41:41 

1.52 50:50 19 1.50 49:49 18 1.63 41:41 5:50 15 1.45 16:49 17 1.39 17:41 1:50 1.4 1.42 13:49 1.5 1.51 13:41 1.40 50:50 1,400 1.41 49:49 1,400 1.53 41:41 1.68 48:50 79 2.16 49:49 66 2.32 41:41 1.12 50:50 26,000 1.19 49:49 25,000 1.24 41:41 

most probable concentration of the element in a 

randomly selected sample from that area. For those 

elements in which the detection ratio is less than 

unity, the mean logarithms were computed using 

procedures developed by Cohen (1959) and described 

for the Missouri studies by Miesch (1976). . 

The analysis of variance and Duncan's multiple 

range test demonstrate the presence of some 

geographic patterns in the chemical composition of sumac samples (figs. 49 - 63). The strongest pattern 

(table 21) indicates that sumacs from the Cedar Glade 

vegetation-type area are chemically unique, being 

characterized by generally low concentrations of the 

elements that were studied. A second pattern 

indicates that sumacs from the Floodplain Forest area 

are distinctly high in magnesium, nickel, and 

phosphorus. A third pattern results solely from the 

high lead concentrations in samples of sumac from the 

Oak-hickory-pine Forest area. 

As shown in the summary tables 15 and 16, barium 

and strontium in sumac and buckbush show the most 

marked differences in concentrations between 

vegetation-type areas. The differences approach an 

order of magnitude in sumacs sampled from the Cedar 
C26 GEOCHEMICAL SURVEY OF MISSOURI 

Glade areas compared to sumacs sampled elsewhere in 

the State. Large differences also occur, moreover, in 

barium and strontium contents between buckbush 

sampled in the Cedar Glade area and buckbush from 

other areas. 

In contrast to the low barium and strontium levels 

in plants sampled in the Cedar Glade area, 

molybdenum appears to be more concentrated in these 

samples. The detection ratios and estimated means 

(tables 15 and 16) support this observation, even 

though tests of significance were not made owing to 

the highly censored data. The higher molybdenum 

concentrations in both sumac and buckbush from the 

Cedar Glade area probably reflect the high soil pH of 

the area, because the molybdenum concentrations in 

the soils do not appear to differ to any great extent 

among vegetation-type areas (table 6), and because 

the pH of the soil from the Cedar Glade 

area-typically, 7.3-is significantly higher than the 

pH of soils collected from other areas in the State (fig. 

43). These observations suggest that the higher 

molybdenum levels in Cedar Glade sumacs reflect 

differences in availability of molybdenum among 

TABLE 17. -Mean chemical composition and chemical variation in 

species characteristic of the Floodplain Forest in Missouri 

[GM, geometric mean, in parts per million; GD, geometric deviation; ratio, number of 

samples in which detected to total number of samples; leaders ( ... ) , no data 

available] 

Species, and plant part sampled 

Sweetgum stems Willow oak stems 

Element, 

or ash GM GD Ratio GM GD Ratio 

Al ...... 1,800 1.85 47:47 2,400 1.89 46:46 

B ....... 160 1.47 47:47 220 1.34 46:46 

Ba ...... 2,000 1.61 47:47 2,700 1.57 46:46 

Ca ..... 270,000 1.14 47:47 280,000 1.12 46:46 

Cd ...... 6.0 2.00 47:47 8.3 1.85 46:46 

Co ...... 1.5 2.36 37:47 2.3 2.00 44:46 

Cr ...... 3.9 1.84 44:47 6.0 1.90 46:46 

Cu ...... 130 1.90 47:47 210 1.61 46:46 

F ....... .66 1.58 11:14 .77 1.72 9:12 

Fe ...... 1,300 1.68 47:47 2,500 1.59 46:46 

I ....... 4.1 1.20 14:14 4.6 1.15 12:12 

K ...... 41,000 1.59 47:47 78,000 1.37 46:46 

Li ...... <4 14:47 4.0 1.54 46:46 

Mg ..... 27,000 1.85 47:47 34,000 2.08 46:46 

Mn ..... 6,300 2.11 47:47 14,000 

1.54 46:46 

Na ..... 670 1.57 47:47 840 1.77 46:46 

Ni ...... 50 1.93 47:47 130 1.32 46:46 

P ....... 9,600 1.63 47:47 21,000 1.85 46:46 

Ph ...... 65 2.09 45:47 120 

Se ...... .065 2.36 47:47 .032 2.02 45:45 

Sr ...... 2,000 1.51 47:47 1,800 1.36 46:46 

Ti ...... 120 2.02 47:47 190 1.72 46:46 

Zn ...... 790 1.53 47:47 440 1.59 46:46 

Zr ...... 6.7 2.30 6:47 <20 10:46 

Ash .... 46,000 1.43 47:47 24,000 1.29 46:46 

vegetation-type areas, rather than differences in total 

amounts of this element that are present in soils; 

Sauchelli (1969) reported that the availability of 

molybdenum to plants increases with soil pH of 6.5 or 

higher. 

Of further interest are the lanthanide-accumulating 

properties of shagbark hickory, as demonstrated by 

the lanthanum, yttrium, cerium, and neodymium 

values that were found. In addition, shortleaf pine was 

found to be a marked concentrator of the trace metals 

aluminum and silver (table 20). 

CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN THE ELEMENTAL COMPOSITION OF SELECTED PLANT SPECIES AND THAT 

OF ASSOCIATED UNCULTIVATED SOILS 

The correspondence between the elemental 

composition of sumac stem ash and soils within each 

vegetation-type area was examined by means of 

correlation coefficients (table 22). 

The concentrations of certain elements in soils, 

expressed as total rather than as available 

concentrations, are often assumed to determine the 

amounts that the plants will absorb, unless the 

TABLE lB.-Mean chemical composition and chemical variation in 

species characteristic of the Cedar Glade area in Missouri 

[GM, geometric mean, in parts per million; GD, geometric deviation; ratio, number of 

samples in which detected to total number of samples; leaders ( ... ), no data 

available) 

Species, and plant part sampled 

Element, Cedar, stems and leaves Post oak, stems or ash 

GM GD Ratio GM GD Ratio 

Al ...... 4,100 2.07 50:50 2,600 1.87 50:50 

B ....... 160 1.33 50:50 180 1.41 50:50 

Ba ...... 320 2.50 49:49 660 2.31 50:50 

Ca ..... 310,000 1.09 50:50 320,000 1.11 50:50 

Cd ...... 1.5 1.52 50:50 2.3 1.51 50:50 

Co ...... 1.2 1.48 45:50 .95 1.97 30:50 

Cr ...... 7.5 1.76 50:50 4.9 1.97 49:50 

Cu ...... 54 1.63 50:50 130 1.49 50:50 

F ....... 1.6 1.58 11:11 1.1 1.69 6:8 

Fe ...... 2,800 1.66 50:50 1,900 1.57 50:50 

I ....... 5.0 1.18 11:11 4.2 1.19 8:8 

K ...... 63,000 1.26 50:50 44,000 1.38 50:50 

Li ...... <4 5:49 <4 5:49 

Mg ..... 30,000 1.81 50:50 31,000 2.02 50:50 

Mn ..... 1,700 2.21 50:50 3,200 2.36 50:50 

Mo ..... 3.4 2.43 22:50 <5 0:50 

Na ..... 220 1.46 49:49 420 1.46 49:49 

Ni ...... 5.6 2.89 41:50 8.6 1.71 49:50 

p ....... 13,000 1.25 50:50 9,400 1.44 50:50 

Ph ...... 100 2.06 50:50 81 1.87 50:50 

Se ...... .021 1.36 50:50 .020 1.56 46:49 

Sr ...... 340 1.63 50:50 320 1.53 50:50 

Ti ...... 330 1.67 50:50 220 1.75 50:50 

v ....... 2.6 3.08 17:50 <5 5:50 

Zn ...... 310 1.27 50:50 300 1.43 50:50 

Zr ...... 24 1.40 30:50 16 1.47 20:50 

Ash .... 60,000 1.16 50:50 42,000 1.31 50:50 
COMPOSITION OF PLANTS AND SOILS FROM MAJOR VEGETATION-TYPE AREAS C27 

elements are present in toxic quantities. The 

correlation coefficients given in table 22, and the 

diagrams in figure 64 which provide a graphical 

summary of the coefficients, contradict this 

assumption, for the most part. There appears to be 

very little influence of element concentrations in soils 

on plant uptake for most trace elements under 

ordinary ("natural") conditions. No significance tests 

of the correlation coefficients are given, because a 

critical r value cannot be established where a nested 

sampling design has been used and where the 

bivariate frequency distributions are censored. Based 

on a conservative estimate of 8 degrees of freedom (N 

minus 2, where N is the 10 independent quadrangles 

that were sampled), the critical r at the 95-percent 

confidence level is 0.63 if the bivariate distribution is 

not censored, therefore none of the correlations is 

significant. Because variation among quadrangles for 

most elements is low and for many elements not even 

significant, a realistic estimate of the degree of 

freedom for this test probably would be greater than 

eight. But even when the maximum possible degrees 

TABLE 19.-Mean chemical composition and chemical variation in 

species characteristic of the Oak-hickory Forest in Missouri 

[GM, geometric mean, in parts per million; GD, geometric deviation; ratio, number of 

samples in which detected to total number of samples; leaders ( ... ), no data 

available) 

Species, and plant part sampled 

Element, 

or ash White oak, stems Shagbark hickory, stems 

GM GD Ratio GM GD Ratio 

Al. .... 1,900 1.62 50:50 2,900 2.27 19:19 

B ...... 190 1.47 50:50 190 1.48 19:19 

Be ..... <2 0:50 1.5 1.21 3:19 

Ba ..... 4,200 1.58 50:50 7,700 2.38 19:19 

Ca ..... 330,000 1.08 50:50 340,000 1.07 19:19 

Cd ..... 4.1 1.39 50:50 18 1.80 19:19 

Co ..... 2.0 2.09 45:50 5.9 2.07 18:19 

Cr ..... 3.5 1.85 46:50 2.9 1.83 17:19 

Cu ..... 130 1.51 50:50 94 1.53 19:19 

F ....... .50 10:12 .78 1.54 3:4 

Fe ...... 1,400 1.88 50:50 1,300 1.67 19:19 

I ....... 4.6 1.22 12:12 4.2 1.12 4:4 

K ...... 51,000 1.29 50:50 34,000 1.31 19:19 

La ...... <70 0:50 110 1.70 16:19 

Li ...... <4 17:50 4.0 10:19 

Mg ..... 18,000 1.86 50:50 25,000 2.11 19:19 

Mn ..... 12,000 1.74 50:50 8,300 1.89 19:19 

Na ..... 380 1.33 50:50 280 1.55 19:19 

Ni ...... 21 1.80 50:50 61 2.42 19:19 

p ....... 12,000 1.42 50:50 8,300 1.43 19:19 

Ph ...... 100 1.85 50:50 100 1.66 19:19 

Se ...... .018 1.43 48:50 .022 1.52 19:19 

Sr ...... 1,800 1.59 50:50 3,200 2.03 19:19 

Ti ...... 160 1.68 50:50 110 1.92 19:19 

Y ....... <20 1:50 23 1.69 14:19 

Yb ..... <2 0:50 1.6 1.19 4:19 

Zn ...... 320 1.31 50:50 1,500 1.65 19:19 

Zr ...... <20 12:50 7.6 1.97 2:19 

Ash .... 36,000 1.28 50:50 53,000 1.29 19:19 

of freedom of 48 is used, the critical rat the 95-percent 

confidence level is 0.27, and only a few of the 

correlations in table 25 are significant. Nickel in sumac 

from the the glaciated prairie exhibits the highest 

correlation with soil values, but even here only about 

25 percent of the total variation can be explained by 

the variation of nickel in the soil of the area. 

The effects of unusual concentrations of a metal in 

the environment on the content of the metal in plants 

are believed to be illustrated by the lead levels that we 

found in plant samples from the Oak-hickory-pine 

Forest area. This area supports extensive lead mining 

(Weigel, 1965), and has been an important center of 

lead production since 1720 (Kiilsgaard and others, 

1967). Lead concentrations in plant samples from this 

area (tables 15, 16, and 20) are notably higher than 

those in plants sampled elsewhere in Missouri (tables 

15, 16, and 19), yet lead concentrations c in the soils 

from the area are lower than those found in soils from 

any of the other five vegetation-type areas (fig. 24). 

Moreover, the slight indication of a bimodal frequency 

distribution for concentrations of lead in sumac (fig. 

52)-suggesting two distinct populations or 

sources-and the higher lead concentrations in sumac 

stem ash from plants growing adjacent to mining 

operatiQns strongly suggest that lead levels in plants 

from this area are reflecting an unusual source of lead. 

This source seems likely to be related, in some 

undetermined manner, to activities associated with 

lead mining in this area. 

The importance of soil alkalinity in controlling the 

molybdenum concentrations in the vegetation of the 

Cedar Glade area has already been discussed. This soil 

property appears to be an important factor in 

contributing to the distinctiveness of the trace 

element chemistry in plants from this area. There is 

evidence of a strong soil pH control on the barium and 

strontium levels in the ash of sumac and buckbush, as 

is demonstrated by the following table of correlation 

coefficients between log concentrations of these 

elements in plant ash and pH values for soils from the 

Cedar Glade area. 

Barium Strontium 

Number of Number of 

Plant specres r Pairs r Pairs 

Sumac ..... -0.71 49 -0.68 49 

Buckbush .. -.53 50 -.58 50 

Post oak ... -.49 50 -.49 50 

Cedar ...... -.59 50 -.49 50 

The degree to which pH affects barium and 

strontium mobility in soils was demonstrated 

experimentally by Bowen and Dymond (1956). They 

stated (p. 361), "Acid solutions generally extract more 

of the alkaline earth metals [barium and strontium] 

than do neutral ones, and the amounts of these metals 
C28 GEOCHEMICAL SURVEY OF MISSOURI 

TABLE 20.-Mean chemical composition and chemical variation in species characteristic of the Oak-hickory-pine Forest in Missouri 

[GM, geometric mean, in parts per million; GD, geometric deviation; ratio, number of samples in which detected to total number of samples; leaders ( ... ), no data avaliable) 

Species, and plant part sampled 

White oak, stems Shagbark hickory, stems Shortleaf pine, 

Element, stems and leaves 

or ash GM GD Ratio GM GD Ratio GM GD Ratio 

Ag ........ <1 0:49 <1 0:7 0.50 2.53 14:49 

AI ......... 1,900 1.57 49:49 3,600 1.76 7:7 39,000 1.67 49:49 

B .......... 190 1.26 49:49 190 1.11 7:7 230 1.34 49:49 

Ba ......... 5,000 1.44 49:49 11,000 1.56 7:7 1,200 1.90 49:49 

Be ......... <2 0:49 2.0 2.18 4:7 <2 0:49 

Ca ......... 340,000 1.06 49:49 350,000 1.04 7:7 130,000 1.31 49:49 

Cd ........ 3.9 1.44 49:49 20 1.60 7:7 14 1.61 49:49 

Co ......... 2.7 2.20 47:49 7.4 1.93 7:7 9.7 1.75 49:49 

Cr ......... 3.4 1.95 47:49 2.9 1.92 6:7 13 1.60 49:49 

Cu ........ 140 1.34 49:49 100 1.25 7:7 160 1.44 49:49 

F .......... .71 1.49 10:11 .84 1.41 4:4 

Fe ......... 1,600 1.43 49:49 1,600 1.57 7:7 5,300 1.59 49:49 

I .......... 4.6 1.12 11:11 4.9 1.18 4:4 

K ......... 49,000 1.22 49:49 29,000 1.21 7:7 110,000 1.35 49:49 

La ......... <70 0:49 270 2.20 7:7 <70 0:49 

Li ......... <4 8:49 4.6 1.52 4:7 <4 19:48 

Mg ........ 16,000 1.50 49:49 22,000 1.63 7:7 34,000 1.40 49:49 

Mn ........ 13,000 1.57 49:49 12,000 1.42 7:7 14,000 1.57 49:49 

Na ........ 340 1.30 49:49 320 1.33 7:7 580 1.45 48:48 

Ni ......... 20 1.63 49:49 70 2.13 7:7 51 1.82 49:49 

P .......... 11,000 1.35 49:49 8,900 1.45 7:7 23,000 1.24 49:49 

Ph ........ 140 1.72 49:49 190 1.65 7:7 250 1.70 49:49 

Se ......... .019 1.43 48:49 .027 1.45 7:7 .062 1.71 49:49 

Sr ......... 2,300 1.88 49:49 5,100 

Ti ......... 150 1.68 49:49 120 

v ......... <5 0:49 <5 

y ......... <20 1:49 46 

Yb ........ <2 0:49 

Zn ........ 350 1.39 49:49 1,600 

Zr ......... <20 10:49 <20 

Ash ....... . 36,000 1.14 49:49 51,000 

TABLE 21.-Geographic patterns of variation in chemical elements 

in ash of sumac stems from Missouri 

Geographic 

pattern No. Vegetation type 1 Variation in chemical elements 

1. . . . . Cedar Glade . . . . . . . . . Highest in calcium; lowest in barium, nickel, phosphorus, potassium, strontium, and zinc. 

2. . . . . Floodplain Forest . . . . Highest in magnesium, nickel, and 

phosphorus. 

3 ..... Oak-hickory-pine 

Forest. 

Highest in lead; lowest (with sumacs from the Cedar Glade area) 

in zinc. 

1 Sumacs sampled in each vegetation type are distinctive from sumacs of other 

vegetation types. 

extracted from soils rich in carbonates are particularly 

sensitive to the pH of the extractant." 

Similarly strong relationships between soil pH and 

plant concentrations could not be demonstrated for 19 

other elements that were tested. Factors other than 

1.56 7:7 570 1.85 49:49 

1.57 7:7 620 2.04 49:49 

0:7 10 2.12 41:49 

2.11 7:7 <20 4:49 

4:7 1.4 1.23 6:49 

1.24 7:7 1,200 1.41 49:49 

0:7 29 2.62 36:49 

1.17 7:7 27,000 1.23 49:49 

soil chemistry, including pH, must, therefore, be 

considered in attempting to explain element cycling in 

the geochemical system of the Cedar Glade 

vegetation-type area. 

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 

1. The investigation of the geochemical characteristics of native vegetation and associated soils in 

Missouri indicated that nearly every element detected 

in the B horizon of uncultivated soils exhibits 

statistically significant amounts of variation between 

the vegetation-type areas as mapped in this report. 

2. Q-mode components analysis of the soil chemistry 

suggests the presence of four factors that have contributed to the observed chemical variation. These 

factors reflect, in general, the strong differences 

between the vegetation-type areas in: (1) presence of a 

clay-rich parent material, or degree of B-horizon 

development, or both, (2) presence of quartz sand or 

cherty residuum parent material, or both, (3) presence 
COMPOSITION OF PLANTS AND SOILS FROM MAJOR VEGETATION-TYPE AREAS C29 

TABLE 22.-Correlation coefficients for the concentrations of selected elements in sumac stems and 'tn associated soils from six vegetationtype areas in Missouri 

[r, product-moment correlation coefficient between logarithms of concentrations; N, number of pairs used in computation of r. Where N is less than 50, the bivariate frequency 

distribution is censored] 

Vemation t;rJ!~ 

Element 

Floodplain Glaciated Unglaciated Cedar Oak-hickory Oak-hickory-pine 

Forest Prairie Prairie 

r N r N r 

AI ...... -0.11 48 0.05 50 0.09 

B ....... .07 44 -.08 49 .10 

Ba ...... -.05 48 .33 50 -.16 

Ca ...... .06 48 .26 50 .25 

Cr ...... -.01 37 .18 40 -.40 

Cu ...... .14 48 .19 50 .00 

Fe ...... .12 48 -.08 50 -.02 

K ...... .20 48 -.07 50 -.16 

Mg ..... -.06 48 .22 50 .05 

Mn ..... .25 47 .02 50 -.02 

Na ..... -.21 48 .12 50 -.04 

Ni ...... .14 46 .53 48 .03 

P ....... .14 47 .06 44 .08 

Ph ...... -.24 33 .17 42 -.11 

Se ...... .32 40 .45 48 -.05 

Sr ...... -.04 48 .27 50 .10 

Ti. ..... .42 48 .11 50 .08 

Zn ...... -.12 48 .12 50 -.35 

of carbonate parent material, and (4) presence of 

feldspathic sand parent material. 

3. Two native shrub species, sumac and buckbush, 

that were sampled throughout most of the State were 

used to estimate the effects of local soil chemistry on 

plant chemistry. Although both species exhibit statistically significant differences between vegetation-type 

areas for a number of elements, the observed differences are less marked in plant ash than in samples of 

the B horizons of uncultivated soils from the same 

areas. Species differences generally are much more 

pronounced than differences attributed to location. 

The most prominent effects of location on plant chemistry are found in the Cedar Glade area in 

south-central Missouri, but the effect is more likely 

related to soil pH than to trace element composition of 

the soil. 

4. Summary tables of the chemical composition of 

stem ash in sumac and buckbush and in seven native 

trees characteristic of one or two specific vegetationtype areas give estimates of typical element concentrations and estimates of the expected variability in 

these materials. 

5. Correlations between the elemental composition 

of sumac stem ash and the B, or equivalent, horizon of 

the supporting soils in each of the six vegetation-type 

areas were found to be uniformly low, only rarely 

exceeding 10 percent common variance in the two 

Glade Forest Forest 

N r N r N r N 

49 0.09 49 0.00 50 0.30 49 

49 -.01 42 .10 49 -.18 48 

49 .35 49 .16 50 .30 49 

48 .30 48 -.11 46 .04 27 

36 .24 31 -.01 40 .09 43 

49 .15 49 .06 50 .12 49 

49 .20 49 -.13 50 .24 49 

49 .05 49 -.03 50 -.06 49 

49 -.03 49 -.05 50 .02 49 

49 .14 49 .35 50 -.01 49 

49 .09 48 -.26 50 .12 49 

46 .17 13 .02 34 -.19 33 

46 -.07 49 .33 40 .13 41 

38 .06 43 .21 37 .45 45 

39 -.04 23 .05 27 .26 31 

49 -.29 49 .25 50 .18 49 

49 .11 49 -.13 50 .20 49 

49 .14 49 .15 50 .21 49 

materials. This result supports earlier studies 

(Shacklette and others, 1970) in Georgia in which the 

chemical composition in the ash of selected vegetables 

and native plants was found to only weakly reflect, at 

best, the chemical composition of the associated soils. 

REFERENCES CITED 

American Association of Petroleum Geologists, 1966, Geological 

highway map of the Midcontinent region: Am. Assoc. 

Petroleum Geologists U.S. Geol. Highway Map Ser ., Map 1. 

Anderson, L. E., and Lemmon, B. E., 1973, Weissia skarpii, a new 

species from North America, with cytological and ecological 

correlations: The Bryologist, v. 76, no. 1, p. 131-143. 

Bowen, H. J. M., and Dymond, J. A., 1956, Strontium and barium 

in plants and soils: Royal Soc. London Proc., ser. B, Bio. Sci., 

v. 144, p. 355-368. 

Braun, E. L., 1950, Deciduous forests of eastern North America: 

Philadelphia and Toronto, The Blakiston Co.~ 596 p. 

Cohen, A. C., Jr., 1959, Simplified estimators for the normal distribution when samples are singly censored or truncated: Technometrics, v. 1, no. 3, p. 217-237. 

Connor, J. J., Erdman, J. A., Sims, J.D., and Ebens, R. J., 1971, 

Roadside effects on trace element content of some rocks, soils 

and plants of Missouri, in Hemphill, D. D., ed., Trace substances in environmental health, Missouri Univ. 4th Ann. 

Conf., Proc.: p. 26-34. 

Connor, J. J., Feder, G. L., Erdman, J. A., and Tidball, R. R., 

1972, Environmental geochemistry in Missouri-A multidisciplinary approach, in Earth science and the quality of life, 

Symposium 1: Internat. Geol. Cong., Montreal, Canada, 1972, 

p. 7-14. 
C30 GEOCHEMICAL SURVEY OF MISSOURI 

Connor, J. J., Shacklette, H. T., and Erdman, J. A., 1971, Extraordinary trace-element accumulation in roadside cedars near 

Centerville, Missouri, t'n Geological Survey research 1971: 

U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 750-B, p. B151- B156. 

Cuthbert, Margaret, and Ward, F. N., 1964, Determination of 

iodine in vegetation, t'n Geological Survey research 1964: U.S. 

Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 501 - C, p. C154- C156. 

Dixon, W. J., ed., 1968, BMD biomedical computer programs: 

California Univ. Press, 600 p. 

Duncan, D. B., 1955, Multiple range and multiple F tests: Biometrics, v. 11, no. 4, p. 1- 42. 

Ebens, R. J., Erdman, J. A., Feder, G. L., Case, A. A., and Selby, 

L.A., 1973, Geochemical anomalies of a claypit area, Callaway 

County, Missouri, and related metabolic imbalance in beef 

cattle: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 807, 24 p. 

Erdman, J. A., Shacklette, H. T., and Keith, J. R., 1976, 

Elemental composition of corn grains, soybean seeds, pasture 

grasses, and associated soils from selected areas in Missouri: 

U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 954-D, OOp. 

Fenneman, N. M., 1946, Physical divisions of the United States: 

U.S. Geol. Survey map, 1 sheet. 

Goldschmidt, V. M., 1954, Geochemistry: Oxford, Clarendon 

Press, 730 p. 

Gray, Peter, 1967, The dictionary of the biological sciences: New 

York, Amsterdam, and London, Reinhold Pub. Corp., 602 p. 

Hawkes, H. E., and Webb, J. S., 1962, Geochemistry in mineral 

exploration: New York and Evanston, Harper & Row, 415 p. 

Ingram, B. L., 1970, Determination of fluoride in silicate rocks 

without separation of aluminum using a specific ion electrode: 

Anal. Chemistry, v. 42, no. 14, p. 1825- 1827. 

Kiilsgaard, T. H., Hayes, W. C., and Heyl, A. V., 1967, Lead and 

zinc, t'n Mineral and water resources of Missouri: U.S. Cong., 

90th, 1st sess., Senate Doc. 19 (U.S. Geol. Survey and 

Missouri Div. Geol. Survey and Water Resources Rept.), 

v. 43, 2d ser., p. 41-63. 

Klovan, J. E., and Imbrie, John, 1971, An algorithm and 

FORTRAN-IV program for large-scale Q-mode factor analysis 

and calculation of factor scores: Jour. Internat. Assoc. for 

Mathematical Geology, v. 3, no. 1, p. 61- 77. 

Krumbein, W. C., and Slack, H. A., 1956, Statistical analysis of 

low-level radioactivity of Pennsylvania black fissile shale in 

Illinois: Geol. Soc. America Bull., v. 67, no. 6, p. 739 - 762. 

Krusekopf, H. H., 1957, Soils of Missouri-Genesis of Great Soil 

Groups: Missouri Agr. Expt. Sta., Jour. Ser., Paper 1760, 

p. 19-27. 

Kucera, C. L., Ehrenreich, J. H., and Brown, Carl, 1963, Some 

effects of fire on tree species in Missouri prairie: Iowa State 

Jour. Sci., v. 38, no. 3, p. 179-185. 

Kucera, C. L., and Martin, S. C., 1957, Vegetation and soil relationships in the glade region of the southwestern Missouri 

Ozarks: Ecology, v. 38, no. 2, p. 285-291. 

Kuchler, A. W., 1964, Potential natural vegetation of the conterminous United States: Am. Geog. Soc. Spec. Pub. 36, 116 

p., map. 

Leone, F. C., and Nelson, L. S., 1966, Sampling distributions of 

variance components I. Empirical studies of balanced nested 

design: Technometrics, v. 8, no. 3, p. 457- 468. 

Liebhofsky, H. W., Pfeiffer, H. S., Winslow, E. H., and Zemany, 

P.D., 1960, X-ray absorbtion and emission in analytical chemistry: New York and London, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 357 p. 

Miesch, A. T., 1976, Geochemical survey of Missouri-Methods of 

sampling, laboratory analysis, and statistical reduction of 

data: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 954- A, 39 p. 

Myers, A. T., Havens, R. G., and Dunton, P. J., 1961, A 

spectrochemical method for the semiquantitative analysis of 

rocks, minerals, and ores: U.S. Geol. Survey Bull. 1084-I, 

p. I207- I229. 

Quaterman, Elsie, 1950, Major plant communities of Tennessee 

Cedar Glades: Ecology, v. 31, p. 234-254. 

Rankama, Kalervo, and Sahama, T. G., 1955, Geochemistry: 

Chicago, Chicago Univ. Press, 912 p. 

Sauchelli, Vincent, 1969, Trace elements in agriculture: New 

York, Van Nostrand Reinhold Co., 248 p. 

Shacklette, H. T., Boerngen, J. G., and Turner, R. L., 1971, 

Mercury in the environment-Surficial materials of the conterminous United States: U.S. Geol. Survey Circ. 644, 5 p. 

Shacklette, H. T., Erdman, J. A., and Keith, J. R., 1973, Trace 

elements in unprocessed plant foodstuffs, t'n Environmental 

chemicals, human and animal health, 2d Conf., Program and 

abs.: Fort Collins, Colorado State Univ., unpaginated. 

Shacklette, H. T., Sauer, H. I., and Miesch, A. T., 1970, Geochemical environments and cardiovascular mortality rates in 

Georgia: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 574- C, 39 p. 

Steyermark, J. A., 1963, Flora of Missouri: Ames, Iowa, The Iowa 

State Univ. Press, 1728 p. 

Tourtelot, H. A., Huffman, Claude, Jr., and Rader, L. F., 1964, 

Cadmium in samples of the Pierre Shale and some equivalent 

stratigraphic units, Great Plains region, t'n Short papers in 

geology and hydrology: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 

475 - D, p. D73 - D78. 

U.S. Geological Survey, 1968, Landforms of the United States: 

U.S. Geol. Survey pamph., 15 p. 

____ l972a, Geochemical survey of Missouri -plans and 

progress for first six-month period (July- December 1969): 

U.S. Geol. Survey open-file rept., 49 p. 

____ 1972b, Geochemical survey of Missouri -plans and 

progress for second six-month period (January- June 1970): 

U.S. Geol. Survey open-file rept., 60 p. 

____ l972c, Geochemical survey of Missouri- plans and 

progress for third six-month period (July- December 1970): 

U.S. Geol. Survey open-file rept., 33 p. 

____ 1972d, Geochemical survey of Missouri -plans and 

progress for fourth six-month period (January-June 1971): 

U.S. Geol. Survey open-file rept., 63 p. 

____ l972e, Geochemical survey of Missouri- plans and 

progress for fifth six-month period (July- December 1971): 

U.S. Geol. Survey open-file rept., 145 p. 

____ l972f, Geochemical survey of Missouri- plans and 

progress for sixth six-month period (January- June 1972): 

U.S. Geol. Survey open-file rept., 86 p. 

____ 1973, Geochemical survey of Missouri, plans and 

progress for seventh six-month period (January -June 1972): 

U.S. Geol. Survey open-file rept., 59 p. 

U.S. Soil Conservation Service, 1969, Distribution of principal 

kinds of soils-Orders, Suborders, and Great Groups, t'n 

National Atlas of the United States of America: U.S. Geol. 

Survey, sheet 86, 2 p. 

Vaughn, W. W., 1967, A simple mercury vapor detector for geochemical prospecting: U.S. Geol. Survey Circ. 540, 8 p. 

Ward, F. N., Lakin, H. W., Canney, F. C., and others, 1963, 

Analytical methods used in geochemical exploration by the 

U.S. Geological Survey: U.S. Geol. Survey Bull. 1152, 100 p. 

Ward, F. N., Nakagawa, H. M., Harms, T. F., and VanSickle, 

G. H., 1969, Atomic absorption methods of analysis useful in 

geochemical exploration: U.S. Geol. Survey Bull. 1289, 45 p. 

Weigel, W. W., 1965, The inside story of Missouri's exploration 

boom- Pt. 1: Engineering and Mining Jour., v. 166, no. 11, 

p. 77-86, 170-172. 

17U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, 1976-677-340/85 
FIGURES 10-64 
C32 

9;• 

0 

0 

GEOCHEMICAL SURVEY OF MISSOURI 

93' 92 

50 100 MILES 

50 100 KILOMETRES 

GEOMETRIC MEAN, 

ALUMINUM, IN PERCENT 

CJ s.o 

I A 4.6 

1: : >! 2.8 

0 2.1 

>-

u 

z 

w 

:::> 

a 

w 

cr: 

u. 

50 

25 

0 

50 

25 

0 

50 

25 

0 

Floodplain Forest 

GM4.4 

GO 1.29 

Glaciated Prairie 

GM6.0 

GO 1.21 

Unglaciated Prairie 

GM4.7 

GO 1.34 

Cedar Glade 

GM3.2 

GO 1.42 

25[A·· Oak-hickory Forest 

_- 0 GM2.7 

::; GO 1.47 

0 . // •' . 

25 ·0ak-hickory pine Forest 

GM2.1 

GO 1.63 

QLn - tO M d . N lri 

ALUMINUM, IN PERCENT 

FIGURE 10.-Vegetation-type areas (modified from Kuchler, 1964) classified according to average concentration of aluminum 

in uncultivated soils from Missouri. Each number on the map is the geometric mean concentration of aluminum in five 

samples from a 71

/2-minute quadrangle. 
COMPOSITION OF PLANTS AND SOILS FROM MAJOR VEGETATION-TYPE AREAS C33 

93' n · 

0 50 100 MILES 

0 50 100 KILOMETR ES 

GEOMETRIC MEAN 

ARSENIC. IN PARTS 

PER MILLION 

13 

CJ 7.8 

>- u 

z 

w 

::;) 

0 

w 

c: 

u.. 

Floodpla in Forest 

GM7.5 

GO 2.03 

Glaciated Prairie 

GM13 

GO 1.27 

Unglaciated Prairie 

GM 12 

GO 1.55 

Cedar Glade 

GM8.4 

GO 1.73 

25 ~ 

~ 

IL, Oak·h~c~o~y Forest 

G01.83 

25 [ Oak-hickory-pone Forest 

II GM6.7 

O ~~ ·rh· 11 G01 .67 

NI.OOOOO 

- N 1.0 0 

ARSENIC, IN PARTS PER MILLION 

FIGURE 11.- Vegetation-type areas (modified from KUchler, 1964) classified according to average concentration of arsenic in 

uncultivated soils from Missouri. Each number on the map is the geometric mean concentration of arsenic in five samples 

from a 71

12-minute quadrangle. 
C34 

0 

0 

GEOCHEMICAL SURVEY OF MISSOURI 

93 ' 92" 

50 100 MILES 

50 100 KILOMETRES 

GEOMETRIC MEAN, 

BARIUM, IN PARTS 

PER MILLION 

660 

D 430 

D 250 

Floodplain Forest 

GM660 

GO 1.43 

Glaciated Prairie 

GM560 

GO 1.46 

Cedar Glade 

GM250 

GO 1.61 

25 ~ Oak·hickory Forest 

GM390 

GO 1.78 

0 

"b"'"o••·•;,,,.,.,;,. Forest 

GM340 

GO 1.96 

0 o o o o '~' ,.... a.n 0 0 0 0 

..- M "' Ln 0 ~ M 

BARIUM, IN PARTS PER MILLION 

FIGURE 12.-Vegetation-type areas (modified from Kiichler, 1964) classified according to average concentration of barium in 

uncultivated soils from Missouri. Each number on the map is the geometric mean concentration of barium in five 

samples from a 71

12-minute quadrangle. Only areas of high and low mean concentration are significantly different. 
)5' 

3i:!" 

COMPOSITION OF PLANTS AND SOILS FROM MAJOR VEGETATION-TYPE AREAS 

GEOMETRIC MEAN 

BORON , IN PARTS 

PER MILLION 

39 

,, ')) 9.!. D 33 

D 27 

0 50 100 MILES 

0 50 100 KILOMETRES 

Floodplain Forest 

~ GM 29 

GD 1.44 

0 

50 Glaciated Prairie 

GM33 

GD 1.38 

>- GM 35 

25[lLUnglaciated Prairie 

~ GD 1.40 

liJ 

:l 

0 0 liJ 

a: 

u. 

Cedar Glade 

GM27 

GD 1.48 

2T rn Oak·h~~~; Forest 

~ GD1.41 

0 

BORON, IN PARTS 

PER MILLION 

FIGURE 13.-Vegetation-type areas (modified from KUchler, 1964) classified according to average concentration of boron in 

uncultivated soils from Missouri. Each number on the map is the geometric mean concentration of boron in five samples 

from a 71

/z -minute quadrangle. Only areas of high and low mean concentration are significantly different. 

C35 
C36 

95· 94~ 

0 

0 

GEOCHEMICAL SURVEY OF MISSOURI 

93" .,. 

50 100 MILES 

50 100 KILO METRES 

GEOMETRIC MEAN, 

CALCIUM, IN PERCENT 

0 1.7 1. > 1 0.39 

[:::><>:::·j 0.24 

w:J 0.15 

D 0.065 

TA o=~ 

Floodplain Forest 

GM0.42 

GO 1.75 

Glaciated Prairie 

GM0.38 

GO 1.36 

Unglaciated Prairie 

GM0.24 

GO 1.79 

205[~_Li_L_ ____ ----~C=ed-a~r=G=Iade GM1.7 

GO 4 .52 

0~ 

Oak-hickory Forest 

GM0.15 

GO 2.80 

25 Oak-hickory-pine 

~ Forest 

GM0.065 

. 1 I 1 I 1 I G~ ·~ o-NlD- "' ~ ~ 

OciOO...;N 

CALCIUM, IN PERCENT 

FIGURE 14-Vegetation-type areas (modified from Kiichler, 1964) classified according to average concentration of calcium in 

uncultivated soils from Missouri. Each number on the map is the geometric mean concentration of calcium in five 

samples from a 71/2-minute quadrangle. 
95' 

COMPOSITION OF PLANTS AND SOILS FROM MAJOR VEGETATION-TYPE AREAS C37 

94' 

0 

0 

93' 92' 

GEOMETRIC MEAN, 

CARBONATE CARBON , IN PERCENT 

0.40 

D 0 .054 

50 100 MILES 

50 100 KILOMETRES 

l o~~= 

l 0 ~ 

1 

1 

25 

Floodplain Forest 

GM0.046 

GO 3.06 

Glaciated Prairie 

GM0.055 

GO 2.95 

Unglaciated Prairie 

GM0.046 

GO 3.34 

Cedar Glade 

GM0.40 

GD 8.43 

Oak-hickory Forest 

GM0.054 

GD4.14 

Oak-hickory-pine 

Forest 

0 88~M,..._L() ci ci ci ci ci ci ~ M ~ 

v 

CARBONATE CARBON, IN PERCENT 

FIGURE 15.-Vegetation-type areas (modified from Kuchler, 1964) classified according to average concentration of carbonate 

carbon in uncultivated soils from Missouri. Each number on the map is the geometric mean concentration of carbonate 

carbon in five samples from a 71

/z-minute quadrangle. 
C38 GEOCHEMICAL SURVEY OF MISSOURI 

l Floodplain Forest 

... 9 4 ' 93 ' 92' GEOMETRIC MEAN, GM0.89 

ORGANIC CARBON, IN PERCENT GO 2.09 

2.8 0~ 

D 0.88 "J1 Glaciated Prairie 

GM0.83 

\ GO 1.69 

) , 91 " 0 / 

'~ \ ,---\ Unglaciated Prairie l 

_ _n 

\- GM0.98 

-~~ GO 1.48 

>- u 

z 

Lt...' w 

::::> 

I -y 0 

w 25 Cedar Glade a: 

u. GM2.8 

GO 1.64 

0 

Oak·hickory Forest l_LL GM0.96 

GO 1.69 

'T 

Oak-hickory-pine 

Forest 

GM0.70 

-• ~1. GO 1.81 

0 50 100 MILES ~ "' l.C) ci 0 d - "' l.C) 

0 50 100 KILOMETRES ORGANIC CARBON , IN PERCENT 

FIGURE 16.-Vegetation-type areas (modified from Ki.ichler, 1964) classified according to average concentration of organic 

carbon in uncultivated soils from Missouri. Each number on the map is the geometric mean concentration of organic 

carbon in five samples from a 71

/z-minute quadrangle. 
95' 

. 17 ' 

COMPOSITION OF PLANTS AND SOILS FROM MAJOR VEGETATION-TYPE AREAS 

93' 92' 

0 50 100 MILES 

0 50 100 KILOMETRES 

GEOMETRIC MEAN, 

CHROMIUM, IN PARTS 

PER MILLION 

66 

0 43 

0 30 

>-

u 

25 LoFioodplain Forest 

GM 39 

GD 1.80 

0 

50 

25 

0'------

50 

Glaciated Prairie 

GM 66 

GD 1.15 

Unglaciated Prairie 

GM 65 

GD 1.23 

z 25 w 

' 

::::J 

0 

w 

a: 

u.. 

- 44\48 'A .52 ; 1 

--<- ( 1o I 117 f 

57 ;-.. r _J 48\. " ~ ~ i.e, 40 )(!/ \ l ~J 

) t'J / A I \. / __ I. ) ,..-L _ _ ;q.t95_ ._ 

~ ~ c~:; ~~ade 

OLLJ GD 1.51 

CHROMIUM, IN PARTS 

PER MILLION 

FIGURE 17.-Vegetation-type areas (modified from Kiichler, 1964) classified according to average concentration of chromium 

in uncultivated soils from Missouri. Each number on the map is the geometric mean concentration of chromium in five 

samples from a 71

12 -minute quadrangle. 

C39 
C40 

95' 94' 

0 

0 

GEOCHEMICAL SURVEY OF MISSOURI 

93' 

50 100 MILES 

50 100 KILOMETRES 

GEOMETRIC MEAN, 

COBALT, IN PARTS 

PER MILLION 

14 

CJs.5 

>-

Floodplain Forest 

GM 8.3 

GO 1.72 

25LLl Glaciated Prairie 

GM11 

GO 1.55 

0 

25 Unglaciated Prairie 

GM 14 

GO 1.83 

~ OL..c""""""'"" w 

:J 

0 

w 

~lLJ_ Cedar Glade 

GM9.5 

GO 1.4B 

25 ~ - n Oak·h~~o;~ Forest 

O~ G01.71 

Oak-hickory-pine 

25~ Forest 

0

"' "' 0 

~ 0 N 0 ll> 

GM9.5 

GO 1.89 

COBALT, IN PARTS PER MILLION 

FiP1ll'e lB.-Vegetation-type areas (modified from Kuchler, 1964) classified according to average concentration of cobalt in 

uncultivated soils from Missouri. Each number on the map is the geometric mean concentration of cobalt in five samples 

from a 71

/z-minute quadrangle. 
9 5 " 

COMPOSITION OF PLANTS AND SOILS FROM MAJOR VEGETATION-TYPE AREAS C41 

1---

1 

l_ __ 

9• " 

0 

0 

93" 92" 

50 100 MILES 

50 100 KILOMETRES 

GEOMETRIC MEAN, 

COPPER, IN PARTS 

PER MILLION 

24 

c=J 14 

0 12 

' • 14\ 16 A 

10 ) " \ 

1~ .- , ( 

28 ;-r _j 20\. _, 

--l. I 14)J \ ) ~J 

)I' J 

/ I ' / ., \1 ) , •• f___1~!l ~ 

25~ - Floo:':~n/orest 

O~ GD1.99 

25 Glaciated Prairie 

GM24 

GD 1.66 

z 

~1w 

::J 

~ Unglaciated Prairie 

GM18 

GD 1.63 

a 

w 

a: 

u.. 

2T n Oak h;~~r; Forest 

O~ GD1 .99 

'0ak-h~c~r~~~-pine 

GM12 

GD1.88 

OM r--. 1.0 0 0 ~ M ,.._ 

COPPER, IN PARTS PER MILLION 

FIGURE 19.-Vegetation-type areas (modified from Kuchler, 1964) classified according to average concentration of copper in 

uncultivated soils from Missouri. Each number on the map is the geometric mean concentration of copper in five samples 

from a 71

/z-minute quadrangle. Only areas of high and low mean concentration are significantly different. 
C42 GEOCHEMICAL SURVEY OF MISSOURI 

GEOMETRIC MEAN, 95° 94' , . gz• FLUORINE, IN PARTS 

PER MILLION 

420 

D 190 

0 50 100 MILES 

0 50 100 KILOMETRES 

>-

u 

z 

UJ 

::;) 

a 

] 

25 

25 

Floodplain Forest 

GM 250 

~ 

GO 2.21 

Glaciated Prairie 

GM 460 GO 1.54 

Unglaciated Prairie 

GM 360 GO 1.71 

UJ Cedar Glade 

ff: 

2

0

5 

[ _ _ ..eo_..L"""'"""""L.!o=- 41 0 

F? dJJ GO 2.18 

Oak-hickory Forest 

25o L~ GM 190 

~ 

GO 2.40 

Oak-hickory-pine 

Forest 

GM 160 25 [ 

'~ rC4 ~~~ 66 ~ ~ g g g g 8 8 80 ..-NLnOO 

~ "' Ll) 

FLUOR INE, IN PARTS PER Ml LLION 

FIGURE 20.-Vegetation-type areas (modified from K tichler, 1964) classified according to average concentration of fluorine in 

uncultivated soils from Missouri. Each number on the map is the geometric mean concentration of fluorine in five 

samples from a 71

/2-minute quadrangle. 
COMPOSITION OF PLANTS AND SOILS FROM MAJOR VEGETATION-TYPE AREAS 

'JJ' 92' 

0 50 100 MILES 

0 50 100 KILOMETRES 

GEOMETRIC MEAN, 

GALLIUM, IN PARTS 

PER MILLION 

0 19 

0 13 ~ 8.4 

O s.9 

1(, 

25 Floodplain Forest JA ~~:', 

2r 11-----, Glac:;~;rairie 

Ou__j GD 1.40 

·:· GM 14 25 l~. Unglaciated Prairie 

>- · .. :::/>> GD 1.51 

~ 0 ·.·.·.·.·.· . . c. 

w 

:::J 

0 

w 

0:: 

u. 

2

r n 

obLillb 

Cedar Glade 

GMi1 

GD 1.64 

25 ~ 1L._ Oak·h;~o;y Forest 

~ GD1.54 

0 

GALLIUM, IN PARTS 

PER MILLION 

FIGURE 21.-Vegetation-type areas (modified from Kuchler, 1964) classified according to average concentration of gallium in 

uncultivated soils from Missouri. Each number on the map is the geometric mean concentration of gallium in five 

samples from a 71

12-minute quadrangle. 

C43 
C44 

0 

0 

GEOCHEMICAL SURVEY OF MISSOURI 

!}2 " 

50 100 MILES 

50 100 KILOMETRES 

GEOMETRIC MEAN, 

TOTAL IRON, IN PERCENT 

3.5 

0 1.9 

0 1.5 

' - .1\ 2.1 'A1.8 L ./ I 

) I - f\( ({ 1.7\ 

2.7 ;--r _J 2.9\. J 

-~l. 1.7/J \ f-r-y 

/) I ,.-

36 ' _ / _ ; -~ l I 

>-

u 

z 

w 

:J 

0 

w 

a: 

u. 

''''' GM2''" .1 '""' GO 1.69 

0 

50 

25 

0 

25 

0 

]lb 

Glaciated Prairie 

GM3.5 

GO 1.26 

Unglaciated Prairie 

GM 3.5 

GO 1.53 

Cedar Glade 

GM1.9 

GO 1.43 

Oak·hickory Forest 

GM 1.9 

GO 1.43 

25 Oak-h ckory pine Forest 

GM1 .5 

GO 1.51 

0 . r-. ~ lt) ,.... 

ci ~ M 

TOTAL IRON, IN PERCENT 

FIGURE 22.- Vegetation-type areas (modified from Kuchler, 1964) classified according to average concentration of iron in 

uncultivated soils from Missouri. Each number on the map is the geometric mean concentration of iron in five samples 

from a 71

/z -minue quadrangle. 
95" 

COMPOSITION OF PLANTS AND SOILS FROM MAJOR VEGETATION-TYPE AREAS 

94' 93" 92' 

0 50 100 MILES 

0 50 100 Kl LOM ETRES 

GEOMETRIC MEAN, 

LANTHANUM, IN PARTS 

PER MILLI ON 

45 

0 36 

0 30 

30 ' 

3~ UL-\, ~ I 

'11 ~ _] 30':\ ( 

__ (f 37 jJ J \ ;-r-y )I ._- / ) , •. -L_' __ ~Z ~ 

>- u 

z 

w 

::J 

a 

w 

a: 

LL 

50 

25 

0 

Floodplain Forest 

GM32 

GO 1.24 

Glaciated Prairie 25 GM 39 

GO 1.35 

0 

25 

0 

50 

25 

0 

50 

25 

0 

50 

25 

0 g g v 

Unglaciated Prairie 

GM45 

GO 1.37 

Cedar Glade 

GM 33 GO 1.36 

Oak-hickory Forest 

GM35 

GO 1.37 

Oak-hickory-pine 

Forest 

GM30 

GO 1.31 

LANTHANUM, IN PARTS 

PER MILLION 

FIGURE 23.-Vegetation-type areas (modified from Kuchler, 1964) classified according to average concentration of lanthanum 

in uncultivated soils from Missouri. Each number on the map is the geometric mean concentration of lanthanum in 

five samples from a 71/z-minute quadrangle. Only areas of high and low mean concentration are significantly different. 

C45 
C46 

95' 94' 

0 

0 

GEOCHEMICAL SURVEY OF MISSOURI 

.,. 92' 

50 100 MILES 

50 100 KILOMETRES 

GEOMETRIC MEAN, 

LEAD, IN PARTS 

PER MILLION 

25 

022 

0 18 

25 Floodplain Forest 

GM19 

GD1.56 

0 

0 

Glaciated Prairie 

GM19 

GD1.31 

Cedar Glade 

GM25 

GD1 .52 

2S~ Jl Oak h:~~; Forest 

~ GD1.50 

50 

25 

Oak-hickory-pine 

Forest 

GM18 

GD1.64 

0 t±O=."' .L.L_jo'-=.L.l- o ol.do 

- M f"'o- LO 

v 

LEAD, IN PARTS PER MILLION 

FIGURE 24.-Vegetation-type areas (modified from Kuchler, 1964) classified according to average concentration of lead in 

uncultivated soils from Missouri. Each number on the map is the geometric mean concentration of lead in five samples 

from a 71

/z-minute quadrangle. Only areas of high and low mean concentration are significantly different. 
')!)• 

COMPOSITION OF PLANTS AND SOILS FROM MAJOR VEGETATION-TYPE AREAS 

GEOMETRIC MEAN, 

LITHIUM, IN PARTS 

PER Ml LLION 

... '.:U" 92. 31 

D 18 

D 15 

llL 

Floodplain Forest 

GM20 

GO 1.63 

0 

50 Glaciated Prairie 

GM32 

GO 1.21 

25 

25 LA_ Cedar Glade 

GM23 

GO 1.55 

0 

C47 

Oak·hickory Forest 

GM18 

0 50 100 MILES 

0 50 100 KILOMETRES 

GO 1.33 

25 U:LOak-hickory·pine Forest 

GM15 

G01 .41 

0 ,..... U') 0 0 ~ M rLITHIUM, IN PARTS 

PER MILLION 

FIGURE 25.-Vegetation-type areas (modified from Kiichler, 1964) classified according to average concentration of lithium in 

uncultivated soils from Missouri. Each number on the map is the geometric mean concentration of lithium in five samples 

from a 71

/2 -minute quadrangle. 
C48 

9>' 9<" 

0 

0 

GEOCHEMICAL SURVEY OF MISSOURI 

93' 

50 100 MILES 

50 100 KILOM ETRES 

GEOMETRIC MEAN, 

MAGN ESIUM, IN PERCENT 

C2J 0.84 

D 0.54 

<;:~ <l 0.33 

18 

0 0.11 

1~ Floodplain Forest 

GM0.31 

GD 1.80 

Glaciated Prairie 

GM0.54 

GO 1.38 

Unglaciated Prairie 

GM0.35 

GD1.57 

GO 2.25 2

0

5 lMt="'--"--'---'--_l_---""'----""'Oak-hicGM0 kory Forest .18 

25 Oak-hickory-pine 

b Forest 

0 ·r±-n l , l,l,l 

v m oo N o o ""'" oc:r m co N 

cicici cici ....:~m 

GM0.11 

GO 1.67 

MAGNESIUM, IN PERCENT 

FIGURE 26.- Vegetation-type areas (modified from Kuchler, 1964) classified according to average concentration of 

magnesium in uncultivated soils from Missouri. Each number on the map is the geometric mean concentration of 

magnesium in five samples from a 71

/z-minute quadrangle. 
95" 

38 

COMPOSITION OF PLANTS AND SOILS FROM MAJOR VEGETATION-TYPE AREAS 

94 ' g.;: • 92 ' 

0 50 100 MILES 

GEOMETRIC MEAN, 

MANGANESE, IN PARTS 

PER MILLION 

710 

D 430 

'T -~ 

25 

>-

(.) 

z 0 w 

:::J 

0 

w 

a: 25 lL 

0 

25 

25 

C49 

Floodplain Forest 

GM710 

GD2.72 

Glaciated Prairie 

GM430 

GD 2.25 

Unglaciated Prairie 

GM780 

GD 2.29 

Cedar Glade 

GM1,200 

GD 1.57 

Oak-hickory Forest 

GM730 

GD 2.16 

Oak-hickory-pine 

Forest 

GM660 

GD 2.09 

t--; 0 

0 

~ II 

0 50 100 KILOMETRES MANGANESE, IN PARTS PER MILLION 

FIGURE 27.-Vegetation-type areas (modified from Kuchler, 1964) classified according to average concentration of 

manganese in uncultivated soils from Missouri. Each number on the map is the geometric mean concentration of manganese in five samples from a 71

/z-minute quadrangle. 
C50 

95" 9'' 

0 

0 

GEOCHEMICAL SURVEY OF MISSOURI 

OJ' 97" 

50 100 MI LES 

50 100 KILOMETRES 

GEOMETRIC MEAN, 

MERCURY, IN PARTS 

PER BILLION 

160 

0 55 

"[ 

0 

Floodplain Forest 

GM57 

GO 2.07 

Glaciated Prairie 

GM68 

GO 1.70 

~ 

,l0 ~ Unglaciated Prairie 

GM46 

GO 1.76 

w 

:::J 

0 

w 

a: 

u. 

Cedar Glade 

GM160 

G02.39 

l0 L:L Oak-hickory Forest 

GM55 

GO 1.91 

Oak-h1ckory-pone 

Forest l '~'.1.. 1, GM45 

GO 2.05 

~~ggggg ..-- N LO 0 

MERCURY, IN PARTS PER 8 I LLION 

FIGURE 28.-Vegetation-type areas (modified from Kiichler, 1964) classified according to average concentration of mercury 

in uncultivated soils from Missouri. Each number on the map is the geometric mean concentration of mercury in five 

samples from a 71

/z-minute quadrangle. 
95' 

J8' 

COMPOSITION OF PLANTS AND SOILS FROM MAJOR VEGETATION-TYPE AREAS C51 

93' 92' 

0 50 100 MILES 

0 50 100 KILOMETRES 

GEOMETRIC MEAN, 

NICKEL, IN PARTS 

PER MI LLION 

22 

>-

u 

z 

w 

:::J 

0 

w 

25 

25 

a: 25 u. 

Floodplain Forest 

GM19 

GD1.65 

Glaciated Prairie 

GM23 

GD1.49 

Unglaciated Prairie 

GM20 

GD 1.88 

Cedar Glade 

GM23 

GD2.31 

Oak·hickory Forest 

GM12 

GD 1.82 

Oak-hickory-pine 

Forest 

GM8.8 

GD 1.75 

NICKEL, IN PARTS PER MILLION 

FIGURE 29.-Vegetation-type areas (modified from Kuchler, 1964) classified according to average concentration of nickel in 

uncultivated soils from Missouri. Each number on the map is the geometric mean concentration of nickel in five samples 

from a 71

12-minute quadrangle. 
C52 

.,. 

'" 

,,. 

0 

0 50 

GEOCHEMICAL SURVEY OF MISSOURI 

92' 

50 100 MILES 

100 KILOMETRES 

GEOMETRIC MEAN, 

PHOSPHORUS, IN PERCENT 

0.074 

D 0.034 

li0 S 

Floodplain Forest 

GM 0.068 

GO 1.86 

Glaciated Prairie 

GM 0.033 

GO 1.58 

z 

w 

1~~ :::l 

0 

Unglaciated Prairie 

GM0.038 

GO 1.56 

w 

a: 

lL 

Cedar Glade 

GM0.083 

GO 1.73 

Oak-hickory Forest 

GM 0.033 

GO 1.88 

25 Oak-hickory-pine 

0 I I I I I N M I" M 1.0 0 0 0 - M CD 

ci ci 0 0 0 ci v 

Forest 

GM0.030 

GO 1.67 

PHOSPHORUS, IN PERCENT 

FIGURE 30.-Vegetation-type areas (modified from Kiichler, 1964) classified according to average concentration of 

phosphorus in uncultivated soils from Missouri. Each number on the map is the geometric mean concentration of 

phosphorus in five samples from a 7112-minute quadrangle. 
\ 

L 

95" 

37 ' 

COMPOSITION OF PLANTS AND SOILS FROM MAJOR VEGETATION-TYPE AREAS C53 

94' 92" 

0 50 100 MILES 

0 50 100 KILOMETRES 

GEOMETRIC MEAN, 

POTASSIUM, IN PERCENT 

1.8 

0 1.2 

c=J o.ss 

Floodplain Forest 

GM1 .8 

GD1 .14 

Glaciated Prairie 

GM1.5 

GD1 .28 

25Lllt CedarGiade 

GM1 .7 

GD1 .50 

0 

25 LriJ Oa k-hickory Forest 

GM1.1 

GD1.61 

0 

POTASSIUM, IN PERCENT 

FIGURE 31.-Vegetation-type areas (modified from Kuchler, 1964) classified according to average concentration of potassium 

in uncultivated soils from Missouri. Each number on the map is the geometric mean concentration of potassium in five 

samples from a 71

/2-minute quadrangle. Only areas of high and low mean concentration are significantly different. 
C54 

95° 94 ' 

GEOCHEMICAL SURVEY OF MISSOURI 

9]' 9 2 " 

0 50 100 MILES 

0 50 100 KILOMETRES 

GEOMETRIC MEAN, 

SCANDIUM, IN PARTS 

PER MILLION 

11 

0 7.0 

05.3 

>-

u 

z 

w 

:::> 

0 

Floodplain Forest 

GM7.1 

G01.58 

25 lJ. · .. • ·. Glaciated GM12 Prairie . GO 1.34 

0 .1 

25 Unglaciated Prairie 

GM10 

G01.33 

:i! 25 ~ Cedar Glade u.. GM6.8 

G01 .59 

0 

"[1 

0 

Oak-hickory Forest 

GM5.4 

GO 1.49 

25 L Oak-hickory-pine Forest 

GM4.7 

G01.78 

Q LO r-- I!) 

v ~ 

SCANDIUM, IN PARTS 

PER MILLION 

FIGURE 32.-Vegetation-type areas (modified from Kiichler, 1964) classified according to average concentration of scandium 

in uncultivated soils from Missouri. Each number on the map is the geometric mean concentration of scandium in five 

samples from a 71

12-minute quadrangle. 
COMPOSITION OF PLANTS AND SOILS FROM MAJOR VEGETATION-TYPE AREAS C55 

GEOMETRIC MEAN. ~ """'''"'" '""" SELENIUM, IN PARTS GM0.31 

92. GO 2.78 95" 'J;J" PER MILLION 

0 

0 .71 

D 25 Glaciated Prairie 

0.30 GM0.73 

G02.11 

0 

25 Unglaciated Prairie 

GM0.67 

GO 1.64 

>- u 0 z 

w 

::J 

0 

w "LA Cedar Glade a: 

u. GM0.31 

G02.10 

0 

': ~ Oak·hickory Forest 

GM0.31 

GO 1.90 

"L Oak-hickory-pine 

Forest 

GM0.27 

-1~1, G02.01 

0 50 100 MILES 1.0 M ..... "? 0 0 0 0 M 

v 

0 50 100 KILOMETRES jt',' 

SELENIUM, IN PARTS PER MILLION 

FIGURE 33.-Vegetation-type areas (modified from Kuchler, 1964) according to average concentration of selenium in uncultivated soils from Missouri. Each number on the map is the geometric mean concentration of selenium in five samples 

from a 71

/z -minute quadrangle. 
C56 

..... 

0 

0 

GEOCHEMICAL SURVEY OF MISSOURI 

93' ., . 

50 100 MILES 

50 100 KILOMETRES 

ARITHMETIC MEAN, 

SILICON, IN PERCENT 

41 

u=J 37 

0 29 

''r 

c_l_~~ "'------' 

l .__L1 0 

Floodplain Forest 

AM36 

so 7.70 

Glaciated Prairie 

AM 32 

so 5.06 

, "I ~ Ll----~~=--~ --"= 

Unglaciated Prairie 

AM34 

so 6.82 

w 

::J 

0 

w 

a: 

u. 25 ~ CedarGiade 

AM29 

so 17.4 

bL~~~----~= 

Oak-hickory Forest 

AM39 

so 7.43 

SILICON, IN PERCENT 

FIGURE 34.-Vegetation-type areas (modified from KUchler, 1964) classified according to average concentration of silicon in 

uncultivated soils from Missouri. Each number on the map is the arithmetic mean concentration of silicon in five 

samples from a 71

12-minute quadrangle. Only areas of high and low mean concentration are significantly different. 
95" 

COMPOSITION OF PLANTS AND SOILS FROM MAJOR VEGETATION-TYPE AREAS C57 

93 ' 92 ' 

0 50 100 MILES 

0 50 100 KILOMETRES 

GEOMETRIC MEAN, 

SODIUM, IN PERCENT 

0 .37 

0.19 

0 0 .13 

50 

50 

Floodplain Forest 

GM 0.62 

GO 1.65 

Glaciated Prairie 

GM 0.50 

GO 1.45 

t; 25 

z Unglaciated Prairie 

GM 0.38 w 

:;) 

a 

w 

cr: 

u. 

25 

GO 1.62 

Cedar Glade 

GM0.13 

GO 1.70 

Oak-hickory Forest 

GM 0.27 

GO 2.01 

25 ~· ··.•. ·•.. . Oak-hickory-pine Forest 

GM0.19 

: GO 1.86 

OLt> N N 

~ ;; ci ci : 

SODIUM, IN PERCENT 

FIGURE 35.-Vegetation-type areas (modified from Kiichler, 1964) classified according to average concentration of sodium in 

uncultivated soils from Missouri. Each number on the map is the geometric mean concentration of sodium in five samples 

from a 71

12-minute quadrangle. 
C58 

93' 

0 

0 50 

GEOCHEMICAL SURVEY OF MISSOURI 

92' 

50 100 MILES 

100 KILOMETRES 

GEOMETRIC MEAN, 

.STRONTIUM, IN PARTS 

PER MILLION 

110 

O ss 

0 42 

25 Floodplain Forest 

GM120 

GO 1.32 

25u ... • .. ·Glaciated GM120 Prairie 

GO 1.35 

0 

l_ls 

0 

Cedar Glade 

GM72 

GO 1.51 

25 ~ f'"""'-. Oak·h~c~o~~ Forest 

~ G01.66 

STRONTIUM, IN PARTS 

PER MILLION 

FIGURE 36.-Vegetation-type areas (modified from Kiichler, 1964) classified according to average concentration of strontium 

in uncultivated soils from Missouri. Each number on the map is the geometric mean concentration of strontium in five 

samples from a 71

12-minute quadrangle. 
95' 

COMPOSITION OF PLANTS AND SOILS FROM MAJOR VEGETATION-TYPE AREAS 

93' 

0 50 100 MILES 

GEOMETRIC MEAN, 

TITANIUM, IN PERCENT 

0.36 

0 0.26 

O o.19 

>-

u 

z 

w 

::J 

0 

w 

a: 

u. 

~ 

lo 0 

Floodplain Forest 

GM 0.26 

GD 1.51 

Glaciated Prairie 

GM 0.37 

GD 1.30 

Unglaciated Prairie 

GM 0.39 

GD 1.34 

Cedar Glade 

GM 0.19 

GO 1.43 

Oak-hickory Forest 

GM 0.35 

GO 1.44 

Oak-hickory-pine 

Forest 

GM 0.33 

GD 1.61 

0 50 100 KILOMETRES TITANIUM, IN PERCENT 

FIGURE 37.- Vegetation-type areas (modified from K iichler, 1964) classified according to average concentration of titanium in 

uncultivated soils from Missouri. Each number on the map is the geometric mean concentration of titanium in five 

samples from a 71

12 -minute quadrangle. 

C59 
C60 

94 ' 93 . 

0 

0 50 

GEOCHEMICAL SURVEY OF MISSOURI 

92' 

50 100 MILES 

100 KILOM ETRES 

GEOMETRIC MEAN, 

VANADIUM, IN PARTS 

PER MILLION 

- 100 

55 

0 37 

25 [~Fioo':;';i~orest 

GO 1.87 

0 

25 

Glaciated Prairie 

GM 110 GO 1.34 

Unglaciated Prairie 

GM 92 GO 1.39 

25lA Oak·h~~o~~Forest 

GO 1.48 

0 

25~0ak·hickory·pine Forest 

GM 37 GO 1.70 

0 u> 0 0 0 ..- M ...... Ll) 

VANADIUM, IN PARTS 

PER Ml LLION 

FIGURE 38.-Vegetation-type areas (modified from Kiichler,l964) classified according to average concentration of vanadium 

in uncultivated soils from Missouri. Each number on the map is the geometric mean concentration of vanadium in five 

samples from a 71

12-minute quadrangle. 
95' 

COMPOSITION OF PLANTS AND SOILS FROM MAJOR VEGETATION-TYPE AREAS 

GEOMETRIC MEAN, 

YTTERBIUM, IN PARTS 

PER MILLION 

3.4 

D 2.7 

93" 92 ' D 2.0 

0 50 100 MILES 

0 50 100 KILOMETRES 

1Jl 

Floodplain Forest 

GM2.1 

GO 1.56 

50 

25 

0 

50 

50 

Glaciated Prairie 

GM3.0 

GO 1.27 

Unglaciated Prairie 

GM3.4 

GO 1.42 

Oak-hickory Forest 

GM2.8 GO 1.44 

25 ~ Oak·h~~~~;tpine 

GM2.4 GO 1.69 

0 "! 

v M ,._ 

YTTERBIUM, IN PARTS 

PER MILLION 

FIGURE 39.-Vegetation-type areas (modified from Kuchler, 1964) classified according to average concentration of ytterbium 

in uncultivated soils from Missouri. Each number on the map is the geometric mean concentration of ytterbium in five 

samples from a 71

/z -minute quadrangle. Only areas of high and low mean concentration are significantly different. 

C61 
C62 

95" <J 4 " 

38" 

0 

0 

GEOCHEMICAL SURVEY OF MISSOURI 

93' 92' 

50 100 MILES 

50 100 KILOMETRES 

GEOMETRIC MEAN, 

YTTRIUM, IN PARTS 

PER MILLION 

37 

0 28 

022 

36" 

>-

u 

z 

w 

:::l 

0 

w 

a: 

LL 

Floodplain Forest 

GM 23 

GD 1.63 

Glaciated Prairie 

GM 30 

GD 1.30 

0 '---='---.J 

50 Unglaciated Prairie 

GM 37 

GD 1.35 

25~·· .. ···... .. Cedar Glade GM22 

. GD 1.79 

0 

2S~ J1.., Oak·h~~o;~ Forest 

Ol___L__L GD 1.50 

25 ~Oak·h~~~~;;-pine 

GM22 

GD 1.69 

0 0 Ln 0 0 ~ M r--

V 

YTTRIUM, IN PARTS 

PER MILLION 

FIGURE 40.-Vegetation-type areas (modified from Kiichler, 1964) classified according to average concentration of yttrium in 

uncultivated soils from Missouri. Each number on the map is the geometric mean concentration of yttrium in five 

samples from a 71

/z-minute quadrangle. Only areas of high and low mean concentration are signigicantly different. 
9')" 

COMPOSITION OF PLANTS AND SOILS FROM MAJOR VEGETATION-TYPE AREAS C63 

92. 

0 50 100 MILES 

0 50 100 KILOMETRES 

GEOMETRIC MEAN, 

ZINC, IN PARTS 

PER MI LLION 

61 

036 

>- u 

z 

w 

::J 

0 

w 

c:: 

LL. 

25 

Floodplain Forest 

GM 54 

GD 1.67 

Glaciated Prairie 

GM 67 

GD 1.41 

Unglaciated Prairie 

GM51 

GD 1.41 

Cedar Glade 

GM 54 

GD 1.71 

25~ Oak-hickory Forest 

• GM 36 

GD 1.59 

0 

25~· .. . . Oak-hickory-pine • Forest 

GM 30 

GD 1.62 

0 0 0 0 0 0 .- N 1.0 0 0 ~ N 

ZINC, IN PARTS PER MILLION 

FIGURE 41.-Vegetation-type areas (modified from Kiichler, 1964) classified according to average concentration of zinc in 

uncultivated soils from Missouri. Each number on the map is the geometric mean concentration of zinc in five samples 

from a 71

/z-minute quadrangle. 
C64 

'J5" 

0 

0 

GEOCHEMICAL SURVEY OF MISSOURI 

n· 

50 100 MILES 

50 100 KILOMETRES 

GEOMETRIC MEAN, 

ZIRCONIUM, IN PARTS 

PER MILLION 

280 

0160 

0120 

>-

() 

z 

w 

:::l 

d 

25 b Fioodplain Forest 

GM160 

GO 1.93 

0 

25 

Glaciated Prairie 

GM210 

GO 1.42 

Unglaciated Prairie 

GM300 

GO 1.52 

~ 25~ CedarGiade 

u.. GM 120 

GO 1.68 

0 

"[ -A ... · .. · .. • ..... · .... .. •. ·······.O· . ·•· ..• ·ak. -hickory Forest 

GM300 

GO 1.63 

0 

25 Oak-hickory-pine 

Forest 

GM260 

GO 1.74 

ZIRCONIUM, IN PARTS 

PER MILLION 

FIGURE 42.-Vegetation-type areas (modified from Kiichler, 1964) classified according to average concentration of zirconium 

in uncultivated soils from Missouri. Each number on the map is the geometric mean concentration of zirconium in five 

samples from a 71

/2-minute quadrangle. 
95" 

COMPOSITION OF PLANTS AND SOILS FROM MAJOR VEGETATION-TYPE AREAS C65 

94 " 03' 

0 50 

0 50 

92' 

100 MILES 

100 KILOMETRES 

ARITHMETIC MEAN, 

pH, IN STANDARD UNITS 

7.3 

c=J s.s 

Floodplain Forest 

AM5.8 

SD 0.68 

Glaciated Prairie 

AM5.3 

SD 0.50 

~I& z 

w 

:::J 

0 

Unglaciated Prairie 

AM5.3 

SD 0.38 

~ 25 Cedar Glade 

AM 7.3 

SD 0.51 

u. 

25~ Oak-hickory Forest 

AM5.6 

SD 0.81 

0 

25 0ak-hickory-p ne Forest 

AM5.5 

SD 0.65 

0 M M M M M 

~ lri cD ,...: ex) 

pH, IN STANDARD UNITS 

FIGURE 43.-Vegetation-type areas (modified from KUchler, 1964) classified according to average concentration of pH 

standard units in uncultivated soils from Missouri. Each number on the map is the arithmetic mean concentration of pH 

standard units in five samples from a 71

12-minute quadrangle. 
C66 

a: 

0 

"-

0 

w 

1-

z 

::::J 

0 

u 

u 

<( 

w 

u 

z 

<( 

a: 

<( 

> 

"-

0 

z 

0 

t= 

a: 

0 

0.. 

0 

a: 

0.. 

1.0 

0.1 

GEOCHEMICAL SURVEY OF MISSOURI 

5 7 

NUMBER OF FACTORS IN MODEL 

FIGURE 44.- Factor variance diagram for uncultivated soils of Missouri. 
95 ' 

COMPOSITION OF PLANTS AND SOILS FROM MAJOR VEGETATION-TYPE AREAS 

94 · 

0 I I I I 

0 

93" 

50 

50 

I 

92' 

I 

I 

-~ ' \ 

), 91" 

\~ 

100 MILES 

I 

100 KILOMETRES 

C67 

FIGURE 45.-Dominance of alumina-rich parent materials in soils, as indicated by composition loadings based on soil chemistry, in 

vegetation-type areas of Missouri (modified from KUchler, 1964). Loadings (a,1x -100), shown as figures on the map, generally 

are highest in the prairie areas (shaded). 
C68 

95 ' 9 4 ' 

GEOCHEMICAL SURVEY OF MISSOURI 

0 50 

I I '• 

0 50 

92' 

I 

100 MILES 

I 

100 KILOMETRES 

91' 

FIGURE 46.-Dominance of quartz sand parent material in soils, as indicated by composition loadings based on soil chemistry, in 

vegetation-type areas of Missouri (modified from Kiichler, 1964). Loadings (Q.z"2X10), shown as figures on the map, generally are 

highest in the Oak-hickory Forest and Oak-hickory-pine Forest areas (shaded). 
95" 

COMPOSITION OF PLANTS AND SOILS FROM MAJOR VEGETATION-TYPE AREAS 

94" 

0 I I I I 

0 

93" 

50 

50 

I 

92" 

I 

' I 

),91" 

/ '" 

100 MILES 

I 

100 KILOMETRES 

C69 

FIGURE 47.-Dominance of carbonate parent material in soils, as indicated by composition loadings based on soil chemistry, in 

vegetation-type areas of Missouri (modified from Kuchler, 1964). Loadings (tliaxlO), shown as figures on the map, generally are 

highest in the Cedar Glade area (shaded). 
C70 

95° 94° 

l 

L 

38" 

GEOCHEMICAL SURVEY OF MISSOURI 

0 

I 

0 

93" 

50 

50 

I 

92" 

I 

I 

~ 

' \ 

),91° 

\~ 

100 MILES 

I 

100 KILOMETRES 

FIGURE 48.-Dominance of feldspathic sand facies in soils, as indicated by composition loadings based on soil chemistry, in 

vegetation-type areas of Missouri (modified from Kuchler, 1964). Loadings (CLj4X10), shown as figures on the map, generally are 

highest in the Floodplain Forest area (shaded). 
95 ' 

COMPOSITION OF PLANTS AND SOILS FROM MAJOR VEGETATION-TYPE AREAS C71 

94' 

0 

0 50 

50 100 MILES 

100 KILOM ETRES 

GEOMETRIC MEAN, 

BARIUM, IN PARTS 

PER MILL ION 

25 

25 

Floodplain Forest 

GM 3,500 

GD 1.84 

Glaciated Prairie 

GM 2,600 

GD 1.60 

~ I c__ ___ ~...,.. ... •"' ............ "'.•"' . ,_Unglaiite;:;~~i ie w 

::J 

0 

w 

a: 

LL 

Cedar Glade 

GM 270 

GD 2.35 

250 [ --='-"=-'-"""""""""0'-'ak-hic kory Forest ~ 

GM 3,400 

GD2.33 

25 

0 0 0 

U") g g 

Oak-hickory-pine 

Forest 

GM 4,500 

GD 2.00 

§ § § § M ,..... ui c) 

M 

BARIUM, IN PARTS PER MILLION 

FIGURE 49.-Vegetation-type areas (modified from Kiichler, 1964) classified according to average concentration of barium in 

sumac from Missouri. Each number on the map is the geometric mean concentration of barium in generally five samples 

from a 71

12 -minute quadrangle. 
C72 

)8 

0 

0 

GEOCHEMICAL SURVEY OF MISSOURI 

92" 

50 100 MILES 

50 100 KILOMETRES 

GEOMETRIC MEAN, 

CADMIUM, IN PARTS 

PER MILLION 

4.4 

0 3.0 

0 1.7 

>-

() 

z 

w 

:::J 

0 

w 

a: 

lL 

'T OY=l 

I~ 

': ~ 

IL 

Floodplain Forest 

GM4.4 

GO 2.09 

Glaciated Prairie 

GM 3.1 

GO 1.88 

Unglaciated Prairie 

GM4.2 

GO 1.83 

Cedar Glade 

GM 1.7 GO 1.48 

Oak-hickory Forest 

GM2.8 

GO 1.63 

25 Oak-hickory-pine 

,lcL I , I , i~'i:~ ,._ "' ci...:M ...... ltJOO M rCADMIUM, IN PARTS PER MILLION 

FIGURE 50.-Vegetation-type areas (modified from Kiichler, 1964) classified according to average concentration of cadmium 

in sumac from Missouri. Each number on the map is the geometric mean concentration of cadmium in generally five 

samples from a 71

/z-minute quadrangle. Only areas of high and low mean concentration are significantly different. 
9>' 

COMPOSITION OF PLANTS AND SOILS FROM MAJOR VEGETATION-TYPE AREAS 

94' 93' 92 ' 

0 50 100 MILES 

0 50 100 KILOMETRES 

GEOMETRIC MEAN, 

CALCIUM, IN PERCENT 

29 

0 25 

>-

u 

z 

w 

:::J 

0 

w 

a: 

u. 

50 

':W 

50 

25 

Floodplain Forest 

GM 24 GO 1.20 

Glaciated Prairie 

GM 26 GO 1.14 

Unglaciated Prairie 

GM 26 

GO 1.14 

Cedar Glade 

GM 29 

GO 1.12 

Oak-hickory Forest 

GM 24 GO 1.20 

Oak-hickory-pine 

Forest 

GM 27 

GO 1.11 

CALCIUM, IN PERCENT 

FIGURE 51.-Vegetation-type areas (modified from Kuchler, 1964) classified according to average concentration of calcium in 

sumac from Missouri. Each number on the map is the geometric mean concentration of calcium in generally five samples 

from a 71

12 -minute quadrangle. 

C73 
C74 

95" "' ' 

0 

0 

9)• 

GEOCHEMICAL SURVEY OF MISSOURI 

' 

GEOMETRIC MEAN, 

LEAD, IN PARTS 

PER MILLION 

61 

~ 0 30 

' \ 

), 91' , ' I 

" .~ ----~ ' 

1-

-~)f f "-,' ,lsv-'y 

50 100 MI LES 

50 100 Kl LOM ETRES 

Floodplain Forest 

GM 26 

GD 2.28 

Glaciated Prairie 

GM 32 

GD 1.82 

Unglaciated Prairie 

GM 28 

GD 2.11 

2l ce;: ~~de 

O~ GD2.17 

Oak-hickory Forest 

GM 30 

GD 2.36 

25~· . Oak-hickory-pine Forest 

GM 61 

• ·• GD 2.23 IF·.,. ' 

0 0 ~ .. 0 .0 0 

NM,...LOO V ~ M 

LEAD, IN PARTS PER MILLION 

FIGURE 52.- Vegetation-type areas (modified from Kiichler, 1964) classified according to average concentration of lead in 

sumac from Missouri. Each number on the map is the geometric mean concentration of lead in generally five samples 

from a 71

/2-minute quadrangle. 
COMPOSITION OF PLANTS AND SOILS FROM MAJOR VEGETATION-TYPE AREAS 

94• .,, 92' 

0 50 100 MILES 

GEOMETRIC MEAN, 

MAGNESIUM, IN PERCENT 

2.9 

0 2.1 

>- u 

z 

w 

:::J 

0 

w 

a: 

u.. 

0 

I~ 

18 

IL~ 

10 

lLL 0 j_ ..... 

0 ~ c:i M ..... 

C75 

Floodplain Forest 

GM 2.9 

GO 1.48 

Glaciated Prairie 

GM 2.2 

GO 1.54 

Unglaciated Prairie 

GM 2.3 

GO 1.40 

Cedar Glade 

GM 2.2 

GO 1.69 

Oak-hickory Forest 

GM 2.0 

GD 1.43 

Oak·hickory·pine 

Forest 

GM 2.0 

GO 1.50 

0 50 100 KILOMETRES MAGNESIUM, IN PERCENT 

FIGURE 53.-Vegetation-type areas (modified from Kuchler, 1964) classified according to average concentration of 

magnesium in sumac from Missouri. Each number on the map is the geometric mean concentration of magnesium in 

generally five samples from a 71/z-minute quadrangle. 
C76 GEOCHEMICAL SURVEY OF MISSOURI 

GEOMETRIC MEA N, 

I~k Floodplain Forest 

GM 760 

95 • MANGANESE, IN PARTS GO 1.74 '}3' 92 PER MILLION 

770 

D lc~ Glaciated Prairie 

670 GM 560 

D 

GO 1.68 

' 470 I 

),., " \ 

" ILL Unglaciated Prairie 

' GM 640 r ---" GO 1.62 

>-

-~~ u 

z 

w 

::J 

a L ~~ w lob Cedar Glade a: I -y L1. GM 470 

GO 1.62 

l LL 

Oak-hickory Forest 

GM 700 

GO 1.60 

' 31' o\ 10 A 

1000 " I Oak-hickory-pine 

5\ o ' '11qo ( Forest 

110( _ j 75 J GM 770 __ I 94o)J GO 1.58 

\ t--r-'( 0 50 100 MILES )I .._--

./ ) MANGANESE, IN PARTS PER M ILLION 

0 50 100 KI LOMETRES w-/_«i4.2..lzCN:: 

FIGURE 54.- Vegetation-type areas (modified from Kiichler, 1964) classified according to average concentration of 

manganese in sumac from Missouri. Each number on the map is the geometric mean concentration of manganese in 

generally five samples from a 71

/z -minute quadrangle. Only areas of high and low mean concentration are significantly 

different. 
COMPOSITION OF PLANTS AND SOILS FROM MAJOR VEGETATION-TYPE AREAS C77 

0 50 100 MI LES 

0 50 100 KILOMETRES 

GEOMETRIC MEAN, 

NICKEL, IN PARTS 

PER MILLION 

17 

D 11 

~ 4 .0 

D 0.81 

>-

u 

z 

2

0

5 ["--"'"""' ...... """ Fioo':;';i~ GD ;orest 

~ 

2.51 

~ 

Glaciated Prairie 

GM 11 

GD 2.15 

Unglaciated Prairie 

GM11 

GD 1.93 

~ 50 

0 

Cedar Glade 

GM .81 

GD 3.56 w 

cr: 

u.. 

25 

l C'\1 M 

l~,l, f"-. U") 0 0 V r- M ,.... 

Oak-hickory Forest 

GM 4.0 

GD 2.82 

Oak-hickory-pine 

Forest 

GM 3.9 

GD 2.68 

NICKEL, IN PARTS PER MILLION 

FIGURE 55.- Vegetation-type areas (modified from Kiichler, 1964) classified according to average concentration of nickel in 

sumac from Missouri. Each number on the map is the geometric mean concentration of nickel in generally five samples 

from a 71

12-minute quadrangle. 
C78 

9>' .... 

38 

37 ' 

0 

0 50 

GEOCHEMICAL SURVEY OF MISSOURI 

92" 

50 100 MILES 

100 KILOMETRES 

GEOMETRIC M EAN, 

PHOSPHORUS, IN PERCENT 

2.3 

D 1.8 

1.4 

0 1.2 

a'--"=='--'= 

50 

Floodplain Forest 

GM 2.3 

GD 1.27 

Glaciated Prairie 

GM 2.0 

GD 1.20 

Unglaciated Prairie 

GM 1.7 

GD 1.24 

Cedar Glade 

GM 1.2 

GD 1.45 

Oak-hickory Forest 

GM1.8 

GD 1.30 

Oak-hickory-pine 

Forest 

GM 1.4 

GD 1.34 

PHOSPHORUS, IN PERCENT 

FIGURE 56.-Vegetation-type areas (modified from KUchler, 1964) classified according to average concentration of 

phosphorus in sumac from Missouri. Each number on the map is the geometric mean concentration of phosphorus in 

generally five samples from a 71

/2-minute quadrangle. 
95" 

COMPOSITION OF PLANTS AND SOILS FROM MAJOR VEGETATION-TYPE AREAS C79 

94" 92" 

0 50 100 MILES 

0 50 100 KILOMETRES 

GEOMETRIC MEAN, 

POTASSIUM, IN PERCENT 

13 

010 

50 

>-

u 

z 

w 

:::J 25 0 

w 

a: 

u.. 

0 

50 

50 

Floodplain Forest 

GM 13 

GD 1.34 

Glaciated Prairie 

GM 13 

GD 1.26 

Unglaciated Prairie 

GM 13 

GD 1.24 

Cedar Glade 

GM 10 

GD 1.32 

Oak-hickory Forest 

GM 13 

GD 1.20 

Oak-hickory-pine 

Forest 

GM 12 

GD 1.22 

POTASSIUM, IN PERCENT 

FIGURE 57.-Vegetation-type areas (modified from KUchler, 1964) classified according to average concentration of potassium 

in sumac from Missouri. Each number on the map is the geometric mean concentration of potassium in generally five 

samples from a 71/z-minute quadrangle. 
CBO 

95' 

37 " 

0 

0 

GEOCHEMICAL SURVEY OF MISSOURI 

50 100 MILES 

50 100 KILOMETRES 

GEOMETRIC MEAN, 

SELENIUM, IN PARTS 

PER MILLI ON 

.023 

.013 

.01 

25 L .•.. . •._ .. ·· ..• ·•.·· . ·.. Floodplain Forest 

GM 0.027 

GO 1.98 

0 

Glaciated Prairie 

GM 0.022 

GO 1.83 

z ~ w 

~l :::J 

Unglaciated Prairie 

GM 0.013 

GO 1.62 

0 

w 

0:: 

LL T0 L Cedar Glade 

GM 0.01 

GO 1.44 

Oak-hickory Forest 

GM 0.01 

GO 1.43 

25 C1 0ak hickory-pine Forest 

GM 0.01 

GO 1.35 

0 ~ <Xl N <Xl ..- N M CO f"-.. 

0 0 0 0 ..... 

ddcidd 

A 

SELENIUM, IN PARTS PER MILLION 

FIGURE 58.- Vegetation-type areas (modified from KUchler, 1964) classified according to average concentration of selenium 

in sumac from Missouri. Each number on the map is the geometric mean concentration of selenium in generally five 

samples from a 7'12 -minute quadrangle. 
" 

)!• 

COMPOSITION OF PLANTS AND SOILS FROM MAJOR VEGETATION-TYPE AREAS 

92" 

0 50 100 MILES 

0 50 100 KILOMETRES 

GEOMETRIC MEAN, 

SODIUM, IN PARTS 

PER M ILLION 

310 

D 240 

D 220 

>-

u 

2 

w 

:::> 

0 

w 

a: 

u.. 

Floodplain Forest 

GM 310 

GD 1.64 

Glaciated Prairie 

GM 250 

GD 1.60 

25 Unglaciated Prairie 

~ ~::l'~. 

Cedar Glade 

GM 230 

GD 1.60 

Oak-hickory Forest 

GM 230 

GD 1.46 

25~ Oak·h~~~~;tpine 

GM 280 

GD 1.57 

0 o 0 0 0 

;: ~ g g 

SODIUM, IN PARTS PER MILLION 

FIGURE 59.-Veget ation-type areas (modified from KUchler, 1964) classified according to average concentration of sodium in 

sumac from Missouri. Each number on the map is the geometric mean concentration of sodium in generally five samples 

from a 71

/z-minute quadrangle. Only areas of high and low mean concentration are significantly different. 

C81 
C82 

95' 94' 93' 

0 

0 50 

GEOCHEMICAL SURVEY OF MISSOURI 

92' 

100 MILES 

100 KILOMETRES 

GEOMETRIC MEAN, 

STRONTIUM, IN PARTS 

PER MILLION 

3,100 

CJ 400 

>-

u 

z 

w 

::;) 

0 

w 

oc 

u.. 

25 

0 

25 

0 

25 

0 

Floodplain Forest 

GM 3,400 

GO 1.62 

Glaciated Prairie 

GM 3,500 

GO 1.49 

Unglaciated Prairie 

GM 3,700 

GO 1.46 

lL __ Cedar Glade 

GM 400 

GO 1.72 

25 

0 

25 

Oak-hickory Forest 

GM 2,700 

GO 2.19 

Oak-hickory-pine 

Forest 

GM 3,100 

GO 1.79 

STRONTIUM, IN PARTS PER MILLION 

FIGURE 60.-Vegetation-type areas (modified from Kiichler, 1964) classified according to average concentration of strontium 

in sumac from Missouri. Each number on the map is the geometric mean concentration of strontium in generally five 

samples from a 71

/z -minute quadrangle. 
.1 Q' 

95 " 

.i?' 

COMPOSITION OF PLANTS AND SOILS FROM MAJOR VEGETATION-TYPE AREAS 

~4' 92' 

0 50 100 MILES 

GEOMETRIC MEAN, 

TITANIUM, IN PARTS 

PER MILLION 

170 

0120 

0 94 l 

_ _L 

GI~ z 

w 

:::J 

a 

w 

a: 

lL 'T 

0 

] 

C83 

Floodplain Forest 

GM 98 GD 2.54 

Glaciated Prairie 

GM 120 

GD 1.65 

Unglaciated Prairie 

GM 120 

GD 1.99 

Cedar Glade 

GM 94 GD 1.77 

Oak-hickory Forest 

GM 130 

GO 2.15 

Oak-hickory-pine 

Forest 

GM 170 

GO 1.89 

0 50 100 KI LOMETRES TITANIUM, IN PARTS PER MILLION 

FIGURE 61.- Vegetation-type areas (modified from Kuchler, 1964) classified according to average concentration of titanium 

in sumac from Missouri. Each number on the map is the geometric mean concentration of titanium in generally five 

samples from a 71

12-minute quadrangle. Only areas of high and low mean concentration are significantly different. 
C84 

95' 94" 93" 

0 50 

GEOCHEMICAL SURVEY OF MISSOURI 

100 MI LES 

100 KILOMETRES 

GEOMETRIC MEAN, 

ZINC, IN PARTS 

PER MILLION 

770 

D 500 

>-

() 

z 

w 

:::l 

0 

25 

lu~ 

Floodplain Forest 

GM 770 

GD 1.63 

Glaciated Prairie 

GM 860 

GD 1.44 

Unglaciated Prairie 

GM 820 

GD 1.42 

Cedar Glade 

GM 520 

GD 1.59 

Oak-hickory Forest 

GM 660 

GD 1.41 

ZINC, IN PARTS PER MILLION 

FIGURE 62.-Vegetation-type areas (modified from Kuchler, 1964) classified according to average concentration of zinc in 

sumac from Missouri. Each number on the map is the geometric mean concentration of zinc in generally five samples 

from a 71

12-minute quadrangle. 
95' 

38" 

COMPOSITION OF PLANTS AND SOILS FROM MAJOR VEGETATION-TYPE AREAS 

~----

' L_ __ 

94' 

0 

0 

93" <?" 

50 100 MILES 

50 100 KILOMETRES 

GEOMETRIC MEAN, 

ASH, IN PERCENT 

4.2 

0 3.6 

D 3.4 

>-

'TO 

0 

~ 50 w 

::> 

0 

w 

a: 

u.. 

50 

25 

Floodplain Forest 

GM 3.5 

GD 1.19 

Glaciated Prairie 

GM 4.2 

GD 1.19 

Unglaciated Prairie 

GM 3.8 GD 1.18 

Cedar Glade 

GM 3.6 

GD 1.18 

Oak-hickory Forest 

GM 3.6 

GD 1.18 

Oak-hickory-pine 

Forest 

GM 3.4 GD 1.18 

ASH, IN PERCENT 

FIGURE 63.-Vegetation-type areas (modified from Kuchler, 1964) classified according to average ash content of dry sumac 

stems from Missouri. Each number on the map is the geometric mean ash content in generally five samples from a 

7112-minute quadrangle. Only areas of high and low concentration are significantly different. 

C85 
C86 

Floodplain 

Forest 

Cedar 

Glade 

A LUMINUM 

CALCIUM 

IRON 

GEOCHEMICAL SURVEY OF MISSOURI 

BAR IUM BORON 

CHROM IUM COPPER 

LEAD MAGNESIUM 

FIGURE 64.- Correlations between the concentrations of selected elements in sumac stems and those of associated soils from six 
COMPOSITION OF PLANTS AND SOILS FROM MAJOR VEGETATION-TYPE AREAS C87 

MANGANESE NICKE L PHOSPHORUS 

POTASSIUM SELENIUM SODIUM 

STRONTIUM TITAN IUM ZINC 

vegetation-type areas in Missouri. The points on the radii indicate the correlations by their distance from the center of the circle. 

U U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1976- 677·340/85