Revivification of a method for identifying longleaf pine timber and its application to southern pine relicts in southeastern Virginia

2011 ◽  
Vol 41 (12) ◽  
pp. 2440-2447 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas L. Eberhardt ◽  
Philip M. Sheridan ◽  
Arvind A.R. Bhuta
Keyword(s):  
Annual Ring ◽  
Longleaf Pine ◽  
Pinus Palustris ◽  
Forest Products ◽  
The Other ◽  
Lower Probability ◽  
Pinus Echinata ◽  
Southern Pine ◽  
Pinus Taeda L ◽  
Standing Timber

Longleaf pine ( Pinus palustris Mill.) cannot be distinguished from the other southern pines based on wood anatomy alone. A method that involves measuring pith and second annual ring diameters, reported by Arthur Koehler in 1932 (The Southern Lumberman, 145: 36–37), was revisited as an option for identifying longleaf pine timbers and stumps. Cross-section disks of longleaf, loblolly ( Pinus taeda L.), and shortleaf ( Pinus echinata Mill.) pines were measured and the diameters of their piths and second annual rings plotted against each other. From this plot, longleaf pine could be differentiated from the other two southern pine species, demonstrating that a method established with trees harvested more than 70 years ago is still applicable to standing timber of today. No evidence was found to suggest that different growth rates impact method applicability. In those situations where the second annual ring is intact, but not the pith, very large second annual ring diameters (>40 mm) may identify timbers with a lower probability of being longleaf pine. In addition to the identification of very old lightwood stumps as part of a longleaf pine restoration effort, both methods may be applied to timber identification in historic structures and the niche forest products industry involving the recovery and processing of highly prized longleaf pine logs from river bottoms. Measurements from relicts sampled in this study were consistent with the purported range for longleaf pine in Virginia.

scholarly journals Effects of Pythium Species and Time in Cold Storage on the Survival of Bareroot and Container-Grown Southern Pine Seedlings

ISRN Ecology ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 2012 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
D. Paul Jackson ◽  
Scott A. Enebak ◽  
David B. South
Keyword(s):  
Loblolly Pine ◽  
Longleaf Pine ◽  
Pinus Palustris ◽  
Pinus Elliottii ◽  
Slash Pine ◽  
Pinus Echinata ◽  
Shortleaf Pine ◽  
Southern Pine ◽  
Pythium Irregulare ◽  
Moist Environment

Cold storing bareroot southern pine (Pinus spp.) seedlings for greater than one week after lifting in the fall can lead to poor outplanting survival when compared to seedlings that are lifted and stored in winter. In contrast, container-grown seedlings typically do not experience adverse effects from storing for periods greater than one week. The practice of lifting bareroot seedlings can cause wounds to root systems, which could allow soil-borne pathogens such as Pythium species to be used as infection sites. Once seedlings are placed in storage, the cool, moist environment may be conducive for zoospore activity, leading to root disease and outplanting failure. Bareroot and container-grown longleaf pine (Pinus palustris), loblolly pine (Pinus taeda), and slash pine (Pinus elliottii) and container-grown shortleaf pine (Pinus echinata) were inoculated with either Pythium dimorphum or Pythium irregulare, cold-stored for 3, 4, 6, or 12 weeks, and outplanted. Both Pythium species reduced survival of bareroot longleaf pine but not bareroot slash pine. Length of storage decreased survival for both seedling stock types. Pythium species did not affect the survival of container-grown seedlings. These results suggest that P. dimorphum and P. irregulare are more virulent to bareroot longleaf pine than the other pine species tested.

scholarly journals Intra-Annual Variation in Soil C, N and Nutrients Pools after Prescribed Fire in a Mississippi Longleaf Pine (Pinus palustris Mill.) Plantation

Forests ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 181
Author(s):  
John R. Butnor ◽  
Kurt H. Johnsen ◽  
Christopher A. Maier ◽  
C. Dana Nelson
Keyword(s):  
Prescribed Fire ◽  
Forest Floor ◽  
Soil Chemistry ◽  
Annual Variation ◽  
Longleaf Pine ◽  
Pinus Palustris ◽  
Southern Pine ◽  
Soil C ◽  
Soil C And N ◽  
C And N

Prescribed fire is an essential tool that is widely used for longleaf pine (Pinus palustris Mill.) stand management; periodic burning serves to reduce competition from woody shrubs and fire-intolerant trees and enhance herbaceous diversity. Low-intensity, prescribed burning is thought to have minimal long-term impact on soil chemistry in southern pine forests, although few studies report the intra-annual variation in soil chemistry after burning. We monitored changes in C, N, oxidation resistant C (CR), pH and elemental nutrients in the forest floor and soil (0–5, 5–10 cm depths) before and after burning (1, 3, 6, 12 months) in a mature longleaf pine plantation at the Harrison Experimental Forest, near Saucier, Mississippi. Prescribed fire consumed much of the forest floor (11.3 Mg ha−1; −69%), increased soil pH and caused a pulse of C, N and elemental nutrients to flow to the near surface soils. In the initial one to three months post-burn coinciding with the start of the growing season, retention of nutrients by soil peaked. Most of the N (93%), Ca (88%), K (96%) and Mg (101%), roughly half of the P (48%) and Mn (52%) and 25% of the C lost from the forest floor were detected in the soil and apparently not lost to volatilization. By month 12, soil C and N pools were not different at depths of 0–5 cm but declined significantly below pre-burn levels at depths of 5–10 cm, C −36% (p < 0.0001), N −26% (p = 0.003), contrary to other examples in southern pine ecosystems. In the upper 5 cm of soil, only Cu (−49%) remained significantly lower than pre-burn contents by month 12, at depths of 5–10 cm, Cu (−76%), Fe (−22%), K (−51%), Mg (−57%), Mn (−82%) and P (−52%) remain lower at month 12 than pre-burn contents. Burning did not increase soil CR content, conversely significant declines in CR occurred. It appears that recovery of soil C and N pools post-burn will require more time on this site than other southern pine forests.

Temporal Relationship Between Southern Pine Beetle (Coleoptera: Scolytidae) and Pinewood Nematode Infestations in Southern Pines

1992 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 194-201 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. N. Kinn ◽  
M. J. Linit
Keyword(s):  
Bursaphelenchus Xylophilus ◽  
Dendroctonus Frontalis ◽  
Southern Pine Beetle ◽  
Pinewood Nematode ◽  
Pinus Echinata ◽  
Southern Pine ◽  
Pine Beetle ◽  
Pinus Taeda L ◽  
Southern Pine Beetles ◽  
Pine Beetles

The incidence of feeding scars of the cerambycid vectors of the pinewood nematode (Bursaphelenchus xylophilus (Steiner and Buhrer) Nickel) on twigs of loblolly (Pinus taeda L.) and shortleaf (Pinus echinata Mill.) pines in central Louisiana was determined. Feeding scars on twigs taken from pines felled at random were compared to those on twigs taken from pines adjacent to southern pine beetle (Dendroctonus frontalis Zimmermann) infestations. Additionally, the presence of pinewood nematode in trees attacked by southern pine beetle was followed through the course of beetle development. Significantly more cerambycid feeding scars were present on twigs of trees located near the advancing edge of a southern pine beetle infestation than on twigs not adjacent or near any known southern pine beetle infestation. From 82 to 100% of the trees sampled adjacent to bark beetle infestations had been fed upon by cerambycids. Pinewood nematodes were recovered from 79% of these trees. The incidence of nematodes in the boles of trees attacked by southern pine beetles increased as immature beetles entered their later instars. The highest incidence of nematodes was from trees recently vacated by southern pine beetles. Trees killed by the southern pine beetle may thus serve as reservoirs for the pinewood nematode and its cerambycid vectors and lead to the infestation of adjacent trees and facilitate subsequent SPB colonization.

scholarly journals (36) Evaluating an Agroforestry Approach to Woody Cuts Production in Florida

HortScience ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 41 (4) ◽  
pp. 1026A-1026
Author(s):  
Mack Thetford ◽  
Shibu Jose ◽  
Edward H. Fletcher
Keyword(s):  
Native Species ◽  
Production Systems ◽  
Longleaf Pine ◽  
Pinus Palustris ◽  
Forest Products ◽  
Agroforestry Systems ◽  
Small Scale ◽  
Timber Species ◽  
System Productivity ◽  
Cut Foliage

The demand for special forest products used in the floral industry has a rapidly expanding market. Woody cuts come from perennial shrubs, trees, or woody vines, and are used as floral design materials for the flowering branches, foliage, fruits, or stems. Evaluation of specialty and woody cut production is needed to determine if these plants may be adapted to sustainable agroforestry production systems. An agroforestry approach to woody cuts production for longleaf pine (Pinus palustris) producers in Florida is a natural approach given the relatively open canopy of this timber species and the occurrence of several native species with ornamental characteristics that are currently utilized on a small scale for woody cuts production. The present approach to evaluating the suitability of these systems utilizes the following objectives: 1) Evaluate the production potential of ornamental species in monoculture and agroforestry silviculture systems and determine the biophysical interactions between system components. This objective will assess system design and its role on system productivity; determine time to ornamental yield. 2) Quantify the cost of establishing ornamentals for woody cuts production in both monoculture and agroforestry systems. This objective will identify and track overhead/fixed costs and variable costs associated with the ornamental cuts and timber crops for monoculture and agroforestry production systems over a 3-year period. 3) Investigate potential markets for the distribution and sale of cut foliage, flowers or stems. This objective will lead to consultations with florists and cut foliage wholesalers about potential market volume, price, and specifications for products produced within the longleaf pine agroforestry production system.

scholarly journals Twenty Years of Prescribed Burning Influence the Development of Direct-Seeded Longleaf Pine on a Wet Pine Site in Louisiana

2000 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 86-92 ◽  
Author(s):  
James D. Haywood ◽  
Harold E. Grelen
Keyword(s):  
Loblolly Pine ◽  
Prescribed Burning ◽  
Longleaf Pine ◽  
Basal Area ◽  
Pinus Palustris ◽  
Fire Regimes ◽  
The Other ◽  
Direct Seeded ◽  
Longleaf Pines ◽  
Initial Research

Abstract Prescribed burning treatments were applied over a 20 yr period in a completely randomized field study to determine the effects of various fire regimes on vegetation in a direct seeded stand of longleaf pine (Pinus palustris Mill.). Seeding was done in November 1968. The study area was broadcast-burned about 16 months after seeding. The initial research treatments were applied in 1973, and as many as 12 research burns were applied through 1993. Pines were measured in March 1995. Prescribed burning resulted in a greater stocking of longleaf pine (an average of 598 trees/ac) on treated plots than on unburned plots (30 trees/ac). However, on the burned treatments, longleaf pines were significantly smaller (2.5 ft3/tree of stemwood) than were the unburned trees (3.7ft3/tree of stemwood). Half of the treated plots were burned in early March, and the other half were burned in early May. Seasons of burning did not significantly influence longleaf pine stocking. However, use of fire in May resulted in significantly greater basal area (100 ft2/ac) and stemwood production (1,921 ft3/ac) than burning in March (59 ft2/ac and 909 ft3/ac). Fire effectively kept natural loblolly pine (P. taeda L.) seedlings from reaching sapling size, but loblolly saplings and poles dominated the unburned plots (710 trees/ac). When all pines were considered on all treatments, stocking ranged from 467 to 740 trees/ac, but stocking was not significantly different among treatments. The unburned plots had significantly greater total basal area (149 ft2/ac) and stemwood productivity (2,918 ft3/ac) than the burned treatments (82 ft2/ac and 1,459 ft3 /ac). Likewise, hardwoods that were at least 1 in. dbh were more common on unburned p lots (327 stems/ac) than on burned treatments (58 stems/ac). South. J. Appl. For. 24(2):86-92.

Differential impacts of the southern pine beetle, Dendroctonus frontalis, on Pinus palustris and Pinus taeda

2007 ◽  
Vol 37 (8) ◽  
pp. 1427-1437 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicholas A. Friedenberg ◽  
Brenda M. Whited ◽  
Daniel H. Slone ◽  
Sharon J. Martinson ◽  
Matthew P. Ayres
Keyword(s):  
Pinus Taeda ◽  
Loblolly Pine ◽  
Tree Mortality ◽  
Longleaf Pine ◽  
Pinus Palustris ◽  
Dendroctonus Frontalis ◽  
Southern Pine Beetle ◽  
Thanasimus Dubius ◽  
Southern Pine ◽  
Pine Beetle

Patterns of host use by herbivore pests can have serious consequences for natural and managed ecosystems but are often poorly understood. Here, we provide the first quantification of large differential impacts of the southern pine beetle, Dendroctonus frontalis Zimmermann, on loblolly pine, Pinus taeda L., and longleaf pine, Pinus palustris P. Mill., and evaluate putative mechanisms for the disparity. Spatially extensive survey data from recent epidemics indicate that, per square kilometre, stands of loblolly versus longleaf pine in four forests (380–1273 km2) sustained 3–18 times more local infestations and 3–116 times more tree mortality. Differences were not attributable to size or age structure of pine stands. Using pheromone-baited traps, we found no differences in the abundance of dispersing D. frontalis or its predator Thanasimus dubius Fabricius between loblolly and longleaf stands. Trapping triggered numerous attacks on trees, but the pine species did not differ in the probability of attack initiation or in the surface area of bark attacked by growing aggregations. We found no evidence for postaggregation mechanisms of discrimination or differential success on the two hosts, suggesting that early colonizers discriminate between host species before a pheromone plume is present.

Why does longleaf pine have low susceptibility to southern pine beetle?

2007 ◽  
Vol 37 (10) ◽  
pp. 1966-1977 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sharon Martinson ◽  
Richard W. Hofstetter ◽  
Matthew P. Ayres
Keyword(s):  
Bark Beetles ◽  
Pinus Palustris ◽  
Dendroctonus Frontalis ◽  
Southern Pine Beetle ◽  
Southern Pine ◽  
Differential Impact ◽  
Pine Beetle ◽  
Tree Defenses ◽  
Pinus Taeda L ◽  
Individual Trees

Pine forests throughout the world are subject to disturbance from tree-killing bark beetles, but pine species differ in their susceptibilities. In the southeastern United States, Pinus palustris Mill. suffers far less mortality from the southern pine beetle, Dendroctonus frontalis Zimmermann, than do its sympatric congeners. We tested the commonly invoked hypothesis that P. palustris has relatively low susceptibility because it has higher oleoresin flow than other pines, especially Pinus taeda L. However, seven studies in three states over 6 years refuted the hypothesis that P. palustris and P. taeda differ in their constitutive resin flow or in their capacity to replace resin depleted by either experimental wounding or natural beetle attacks. Additionally, surveys of natural beetle attacks revealed that P. taeda and P. palustris were equally likely to be attacked and killed when they cooccurred in front of growing infestations. Thus, the relative susceptibility of these two species changes with the spatial scale at which they are mixed, and the strong landscape-scale pattern of low mortality in P. palustris is not because individual trees are physiologically less susceptible. Ultimately, the conspicuous differential impact of D. frontalis on P. taeda and P. palustris may be the product of coevolution between tree defenses and beetle behavior.

scholarly journals Economics of Southern Pines With and Without Payments for Environmental Amenities in the US South

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karuna Paudel ◽  
Puneet Dwivedi
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Carbon Storage ◽  
Longleaf Pine ◽  
Pinus Palustris ◽  
Forest Products ◽  
Pinus Elliottii ◽  
Southern United States ◽  
South Georgia ◽  
Southern Pines ◽  
Pine Straw

During the early 1900s, nearly 37 million hectares of land in the Southern United States were under longleaf pine (Pinus palustris) relative to the current area of 1.6 million hectares. This study compares the economics of southern pines (longleaf, loblolly (Pinus taeda), and slash (Pinus elliottii)) to facilitate the decision making of family forest landowners and design suitable financial incentives for increasing the area under longleaf pine in the region. We simulated six growth and yield scenarios for selected southern pines over three site indices in the Lower Coastal Plain of South Georgia. We estimated land expectation values (LEVs) of each scenario for the three cases, i.e., payment for forest products, payment for forest products and net carbon storage, and payment for forest products, net carbon storage, and net water yield. Our findings show that pine straw income significantly increases the LEV of longleaf pine. The financial risk of growing longleaf pine is lower than that of other southern pines. Existing financial support through various governmental incentives or additional monetary support for ecosystem services provided by longleaf pine ecosystems is needed to increase the area under longleaf pine in the Southern United States, in general, and in South Georgia, in particular. However, a need exists to reevaluate the conservation values provided by longleaf plantations considering expected shorter rotation ages due to the income provided by pine straw markets in Southern United States.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document