Direct and Indirect Estimates of Seed Versus Pollen Movement Within a Population of Ponderosa Pine

Evolution ◽  
1998 ◽  
Vol 52 (1) ◽  
pp. 61 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert G. Latta ◽  
Yan B. Linhart ◽  
David Fleck ◽  
Michael Elliot
Keyword(s):  
Ponderosa Pine ◽  
Pollen Movement

scholarly journals DIRECT AND INDIRECT ESTIMATES OF SEED VERSUS POLLEN MOVEMENT WITHIN A POPULATION OF PONDEROSA PINE

Evolution ◽  
1998 ◽  
Vol 52 (1) ◽  
pp. 61-67 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert G. Latta ◽  
Yan B. Linhart ◽  
David Fleck ◽  
Michael Elliot
Keyword(s):  
Ponderosa Pine ◽  
Pollen Movement

Lick Creek historic photographic series: a century of change in a ponderosa pine forest in western Montana, US

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sharon M. Hood ◽  
Duncan C. Lutes ◽  
Justin S. Crotteau ◽  
Christopher R. Keyes ◽  
Anna Sala ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ponderosa Pine ◽  
Pine Forest ◽  
Western Montana ◽  
Ponderosa Pine Forest

Vegetation and soil effects from prescribed, wild, and combined fire events along a ponderosa pine and grassland mosaic

2007 ◽  
Author(s):  
Theresa Jain ◽  
Molly Juillerat ◽  
Jonathan Sandquist ◽  
Mike Ford ◽  
Brad Sauer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ponderosa Pine ◽  
Soil Effects

Ponderosa Pine Productivity in Relation to Soil and Landform in Western Montana

1960 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 139-142 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. S. Cox ◽  
R. C. McConnell ◽  
L. M. Matthew
Keyword(s):  
Ponderosa Pine ◽  
Western Montana

scholarly journals Evaluation of Physical Barriers to Protect Ponderosa Pine Seedlings from Pocket Gophers

1999 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 164-168 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael J. Pipas ◽  
Gary W. Witmer
Keyword(s):  
Pinus Ponderosa ◽  
Ponderosa Pine ◽  
Seedling Mortality ◽  
Pocket Gophers ◽  
Thomomys Talpoides ◽  
Pine Seedlings ◽  
Physical Barriers ◽  
Growth Of Seedlings ◽  
Medium Weight ◽  
Better Than

Abstract A 2 yr study on the Rogue River and Mt. Hood National Forests in Oregon evaluated physical barriers for protection of Pinus ponderosa seedlings against damage by Thomomys talpoides. Seedlings protected with one of three weights of: (1) plastic mesh tubing (Vexar®) or (2) sandpapertubing (Durite®) were evaluated against control seedlings. On the Rogue River sites, Vexar® seedlings had the highest survival (62.6%), followed by the controls (59.1%), then Durite® seedlings (17.9%). Gophers were the primary cause of death for the Vexar® seedlings, versus desiccation for the Durite® seedlings. On the Mt. Hood sites, heavyweight Vexar® seedlings had the highest survival (35.4%), medium-weight Durite® seedlings the lowest (2.7%). Seedling mortality caused by gophers was highest for controls (70.2%), followed by light-weight (62.2%) and heavy-weight (53.9%) Vexar® treatments. Overall survival was low (Rogue River = 42%, Mt. Hood = 19.8%). Growth was greatest for the control seedlings but only significantly greater than growth of Durite® seedlings on the Rogue River sites. Growth of seedlings was not compromised by the Vexar® tubing. Although neither type of tubing was highly protective, Vexar® tubes performed better than Durite® tubes. West. J. Appl. For. 14(3):164-168.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document