V. novae-angliae was under special concern in Minnesota and Maine in 1988 (Smith, 1988). In Michigan, V. novae-angliae is listed as threatened (Ballard and Gawler, 1994). In New York V. novae-angliae populations have only been recorded in Warren County and are labeled as endangered (USDA Plants, 2014; Ballard and Gawler, 1994). V. novae-angliae habitat in New York is restricted to shorelines along rivers (Mitchell and Sheviak, 1981). The success of V. novae-angliae is continuously threatened by the overgrowth of forest in that area (Mitchell and Sheviak, 1994). Populations in Wisconsin are threatened (Ballard and Gawler, 1994). Due to abundant populations in Minnesota and Wisconsin, a proposal to delist V. novae-angliae from the conservation list was suggested (Ballard and Gawler, 1994).
Manitoba’s proposed conservation status is threatened and New Brunswick’s conservation status is endangered (Ballard and Gawler, 1994). Ontario does not have an official conservation status or a proposed status (Ballard and Gawler, 1994).
In the United States, Viola novae-angliae occurs in New York, Vermont, New Hampshire, Maine, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota. (USDA Plants, 2014; Mitchell and Sheviak, 1981; Britton and Brown, 1970). County- level distribution is available for New York, Maine, Wisconsin, and Minnesota, but not for Vermont and New Hampshire (USDA Plants, 2014). The range of V. novae-angliae also extends into three Canadian provinces including New Brunswick, Ontario, and Manitoba (USDA Plants, 2014; Britton and Brown, 1970).
In New York, V. novae-angliae is native only to Warren County (USDA Plants, 2014; Mitchell and Sheviak, 1981). In Maine, V. novae-angliae is native to Aroostock and Penebscot Counties (USDA Plants, 2014; Britton and Brown, 1970). In Wisconsin, V. novae-angliae is native to Sheboygan, Brown, Winnebago, Oconto, Door, Marinette, Forest, Iron, Lincoln, Marathon, Sawyer, Portage, Wood, Rusk, Taylor, Chippewa, Eau Claire, Barron, Washburn, and Douglas Counties (USDA Plants, 2014; Britton and Brown, 1970). In Minnesota, V. novae-angliae is native to Cook, Lake, St. Louis, Carlton, Pine, Thasca, Cass, Koochiching, Roseau, Lake of the Woods, and Pine Counties (USDA Plants, 2014; Britton and Brown, 1970).
Ballard and Gawler (1994) performed field searches to locate V. novae-angliae in Maine, Michigan, Wisconsin and Minnesota (Ballard and Gawler, 1994). Although the populations were frequently found along the St. John and Penobscot Rivers in Maine, the species was not in abundance in those areas (Ballard and Gawler, 1994). In Northern Minnesota, V. novae-angliae was locally common and widespread (Ballard and Gawler, 1994). In Northern Wisconsin, the species was widespread and not locally common (Ballard and Gawler, 1994). The authors concluded that extended and intensive searches for the species in northwestern Michigan, northern New York, northern Vermont, northern New Hampshire, northern Quebec, northern New Brunswick, southeastern Manitoba, and eastern Ontario may locate new V. novae-angliae populations (Ballard and Gawler, 1994).
Ballard (1988) reports populations in northeastern Minnesota, northern Wisconsin, and northwestern Michigan (Ballard, 1988). Smith (1988) reports that V. novae-angliae is common in northern Minnesota (Smith, 1988). McKinney (1992) states V. novae-angliae is abundant in northern Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Maine (McKinney, 1992). Russell (1965) reports populations in northern Maine, but more abundance in northern Wisconsin and Minnesota (Russell, 1965). House (1924) reports V. novae-angliae populations westward of the Great Lakes and in northern New York (House, 1924). Davis and Davis (1949) report a large range, extending north from Maine into New Brunswick and along the Canadian border to Wisconsin (Davis and Davis, 1949). Populations were also abundant in southwest Quebec and southern New Brunswick (McKinney, 1992). This information is incorporated into and supports the current distribution data reported by The United States Department of Agriculture Plants Database.
The following data represent V. novae-angliae specimens collected from 139 historic populations: Manitoba (1), New Brunswick (2), Ontario (18), Maine (14), Michigan (7), Minnesota (64), New York (1), and Wisconsin (32) (Ballard and Gawler, 1994).
If human disturbances do not drastically alter the chemistry of soil or shade of the violet population, they often increase the viability of a V. novae-angliae population (Ballard, 1988; Ballard and Gawler, 1994). In instances where human intervention has enlarged natural areas or exposed bedrock, like road placement through natural clearings, V. novae-angliae density, individual numbers, and fecundity rates exceed those of natural conditions (Ballard, 1988; Ballard and Gawler, 1994).
Most of the V. novae-angliae populations are under private ownership. Minnesota, where populations are abundant and widespread, has the largest percentage of publically owned population sites (Ballard and Gawler, 1994). Populations on public lands near the Great Lakes are managed correctly for long-term success (Ballard and Gawler, 1994).
Before management of populations can take place, estimates of the number of population sites and individuals are needed (Ballard and Gawler, 1994). Habitat protection is important given the specific habitat requirements of V. novae-angliae (Ballard and Gawler, 1994). There is little information regarding management of V. novae-angliae populations (Ballard and Gawler, 1994). V. novae-angliae populations show consistent growth and success across their range (Ballard and Gawler, 1994).
V. novae-angliae is a blue violet that lacks a stem and stolons (long, thin stems that grow along the ground, producing roots from branched tips for new plants) (Ballard, 1988). The violet may also present with slightly different descriptive characteristics as it has been reported to have dark purple petals, instead of blue, with smooth leaves (House, 1904). The flowers are chasmogamous (pollination occurs when the flower is open) and have bearded lateral petals with spurs (Ballard, 1988). Before flowering, the leaves are small and oval or heart-shaped and rounded at the apex of the shoot (Ballard, 1988). When flowering occurs the leaves become long and triangular (Ballard, 1988; Britton and Brown, 1970; Mitchell and Sheviak, 1981; Brainerd, 1905; Russell, 1965). The flowers have narrow, oval sepals that are rounded at the apex (Ballard, 1988). The leaf stalks often have long hairs along their entire length (Ballard, 1988; Britton and Brown, 1970). Underneath the leaves are shorter dense hairs while the top of the leaves have even shorter hairs present (Ballard, 1988). These characteristics are defining traits of the species (Ballard, 1988; Mitchell and Sheviak, 1981). Differences in characteristics may be due to similar appearances in all violets. Additionally, it is possible that small differences in characteristics may have evolved within the species over the 84-year difference in publication of the morphological information.
Midwestern V. novae-angliae specimens are distinguished from V. novae-angliae specimens in Maine based on physical characteristics (Ballard, 1988). V. novae-angliae taxa found in Minnesota and Wisconsin have broad rounded petals with hairy sepals and self-pollinating peduncles that arch horizontally (Ballard, 1988). In Maine, V. novae-angliae petals are not as broad and the sepals are bare whereas the peduncles are completely horizontal (Ballard, 1988). V. novae-angliae should be compared to other stem-less violets in its range to better understand differences in morphological (Ballard, 1988).
V. novae-angliae populations found in Wisconsin and Minnesota are a phylogenetic intermediate between Viola sagittata and Viola nephrophylla (Ballard, 1988). V. novae-angliae is not a hybrid of the two species in that it begins where the V. sagittata and Viola nephrophylla ranges end and continues north where those species are not present (Ballard, 1988). V. novae-angliae has predictable habitats, range and morphological characteristics similar to other violet intermediates and should be labeled as a species rather than a subspecies (Ballard, 1988).
V. novae-angliae is also reported to be similar to Viola septentrionalis in that both lack hair on the sepals, contain narrow leaves and have a range that extends from the northern United States into Canada (Brainerd, 1905). Based on habitat, morphology, and distribution data however, V. novae-angliae may be a hybridized species from V. sagittata and Viola sororia (Ballard and Gawler, 1994). This evidence indicates that range may not be the most important factor determining whether a species is a hybrid or not, and refutes Ballard (1988)
V. novae-angliae may be distinguished from similar species of violets using molecular data. If V. novae-angliae is a subspecies, it is not clear to which species it belongs. Specific habitat requirements of V. novae-angliae should be considered when evaluating its taxonomic status.
In Minnesota, the number of individual V. novae-angliae plants ranges from less than 100 to thousands (Ballard and Gawler, 1994). An estimate of the total number of individuals in Minnesota is 12,420 (Ballard and Gawler, 1994). In Maine V. novae-angliae populations range from 100 - 500 individuals, 20 - 40 individuals, and 10 or less individuals (Ballard and Gawler, 1994). In instances where human intervention has enlarged natural areas or exposed bedrock, like road placement through natural clearings, V. novae-angliae density and individual numbers exceed those of natural conditions (Ballard, 1988; Ballard and Gawler, 1994). Over its extensive range, 91 populations of V. novae-angliae have been observed (Ballard and Gawler, 1994).
V. novae-angliae appears to be more successful in open areas (Mitchell and Sheviak, 1981; Ballard, 1988; Ballard and Gawler, 1994). In shaded areas, population success is limited until a gap develops in the tree canopy (Ballard, 1988). Shaded areas with heavy vegetation may also chemically alter the soil in which V. novae-angliae grows, thereby reducing population success (Ballard, 1988). Flowering V. novae-angliae populations occur often in open areas that are exposed to sunlight (Ballard and Gawler, 1994).
V. novae-angliae does not withstand red pine (Pinus resinosa) forest monoculture management (Ballard, 1988; Ballard and Gawler, 1994). Where management specific to red pine regeneration occurs, successful growth of V. novae-angliae does not (Ballard, 1988; Ballard and Gawler, 1994). In unmanaged areas (on the border of managed areas) V. novae-angliae populations can be found (Ballard, 1988; Balard and Gawler, 1994), but the individuals seem to have discolored leaves, few flowers, and distorted petioles (small stalks that connect the leaves to the stem) (Ballard and Gawler, 1994). Because V. novae-angliae is tolerant to growth only in dry soil with fairly neutral pH, management for pine regeneration alters the soil conditions and therefore the success of V. novae-angliae populations (Ballard, 1988).
Before 1988, V. novae-angliae was thought to grow between rocks on sandy river shores (Knight, 1906; Russell, 1965; Britton and Brown, 1970; Mitchell and Sheviak, 1981). Later observation by Ballard (1988) suggests a different habitat. V. novae-angliae, in northern Minnesota and Wisconsin, was found on dry land in dry or dry-mesic, nearly neutral or slightly acidic soils thinly covering bedrock (Ballard, 1988). V. novae-angliae had been reported to grow only near watercourses because those areas had a greater percentage of exposed bedrock than areas farther away (Ballard, 1988). The report concluded that V. novae-angliae prefers dry or dry-mesic soil in areas where bedrock is exposed (Ballard, 1988).
Viola novae-angliae populations are also found on dry land or near the shore of a river where bedrock is exposed (Ballard and Gawler, 1994).Ditches, bases of granite knobs, mowed lawns, meadows and gravel roads in campgrounds are all Viola novae-angliae habitats (Ballard, 1988; Ballard and Gawler, 1994).
