DOCSLIB.ORG

Mineral Relationships of Western Larch (Larix Occidentalis Nutt.) As Compared with Lodgepole Pine (Pinus Contorta Loudon Var

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Mineral Relationships of Western Larch (Larix Occidentalis Nutt.) As Compared with Lodgepole Pine (Pinus Contorta Loudon Var University of Montana ScholarWorks at University of Montana Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers Graduate School 1965 Mineral relationships of western larch (Larix occidentalis Nutt.) as compared with lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta Loudon var. latifolia Engelm.) William Friedrich The University of Montana Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Friedrich, William, "Mineral relationships of western larch (Larix occidentalis Nutt.) as compared with lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta Loudon var. latifolia Engelm.)" (1965). Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers. 6754. https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd/6754 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at ScholarWorks at University of Montana. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at University of Montana. For more information, please contact [email protected]. MINERAL RELATIONSHIPS OF WESTERN LARCH (LARIX OCCIDENTALIS NUTT.) AS COMPARED WITH LODGEPOLE PINE CPINUS CONTORTA LOUDON VAR, LATIFOLIA ENGELM.) by William Friedrich A. B. The Catholic University of America, 1962 Presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science UNIVERSITY OF MONTANA 1965 Approved by; an^Board of Examiners "7 Dean, Graduate School JUL 2 2 1965 Date Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. UMI Number: EP37555 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. UMI OuuwrMion Publishing UMI EP37555 Published by ProQuest LLC (2013). Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code ProQ^st; ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I am indebted to the Department of Botany of the University of Montana for the use of its research facilities and to Dr. Mark J, Behan of that department for his guidance and direction throughout this work. I am indebted to Raymond Shearer of the Intermountain Forest and Range experiment Station for permission and guidance in using the Coram Experimental Forest of the Flathead National Forest, Montana, I am also indebted to the University of Montana Computer Center for the use of its facilities and to Anton Kraft of that department who directed and programmed the computer work. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE I. INTRODUCTION.......................... I Ob jectiv es ....................... » . 7 Literature Review ...««.eoooo.. 8 Seasonal Variation 9 Problems in method of expression . , . 9 Studies of seasonal trends in mineral content on a percentage basis « * » o 12 Variation and fluctuation of the mineral content with season ......... 15 Effect of Crown Position on the Mineral Content of Foliage . « ........ 15 Studies of the position variation , . , 15 Allowance for the position effect in other foliar analysis studies » o o « 17 Effect of Needle Age on the Mineral Content of Evergreen Foliage ........... 18 Summary and Discussion of Literature Review .......oo«o=.*ooo 19 11. METHODS .......... 28 Site Description ........ 28 Collection Methods . ............ 30 Sample Preparation ............. 32 Element Determination ........... 33 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. i v CHAPTER PAGE Methods of Statistical Analysis . » . 33 Methods of Computer Use . « 0 0 * 0 . 34 III. RESULTS ............................. 37 Introduction .......... 37 Western Larch Foliar Mineral Content .... 40 Effect of Season on Foliar Mineral Content ................ 40 Effect of Crown Position on Foliar Mineral Content ......... ....... 43 Lodgepole Pine Foliar Mineral Content . 43 Effect of Season on Foliar Mineral Content ........ 43 Effect of Crown Position on Foliar Mineral Content ............ 47 Effect of Age on Foliar Mineral Content „ 50 Comparisons and Estimates of Mineral Requirements ............... 54 Amounts and Mineral Contents of Total Foliage on the Trees .......... 54 Quantity and Mineral Content of Needle Litter 56 Needle litter of western larch ..... 56 Needle litter of lodgepole pine .... 61 Amounts of minerals returned to the soil annually by comparable forests . 61 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. V CHAPTER PAGE IV. DISCUSSION .................................... 63 Statistical Appraisal of Seasonal Variation in Mineral Content of Larch Poliaks ......«..«o...... 63 Seasonal Trend During the Growing Season , . 63 Sampling Procedures ..................... 68 Suggested Time of Sampling of Larch . 68 Suggested Time of Sampling of Lodgepole „ 69 Suggested Larch Crown Position for Sampling .................... ...... 69 Suggested Lodgepole Pine Crown Position and Needle Age for Sampling ...... 70 Determination of Sample Size ....... 71 Comparisons of Mineral Relationships .... 74 Discussion of Quantities and Mineral Contents of Midsummer Foliage ..... 74 Discussion of Quantities and Mineral Contents of Litter ........... 75 Concluding Remarks on Mineral Relationships ............. 75 V. CONCLUSIONS AND SUMMARY ........... 77 Season 77 Position .......................... a . ......................... 77 Age .................... 78 Sampling Procedures ............ 78 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Vi CHAPTER PAGE Comparisons of Mineral Relationships .... 79 LITERATURE C I T E D ......................................... 80 APPENDIX I. Chemical Methods of Analysis » ........... 86 APPENDIX II. Tables of Statistical Analyses .... 97 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. LIST OF TABLES TABLE PAGE 1. Variation in Foliar Mineral Content of Forest Trees *#*#**»****««»** 20 2, Collection Methods Used in Foliar Analysis Studies of Forest Trees ....................... 22 3, Stand Characteristics of Study P l o t ............ 29 4. Mineral Content of Foliage from Different Crown Positions of Larch, and Its Within Element and Within Position Variation , , , , 45 5. Mineral Content of Averaged 1964 and 1963 Foliage from Different Crown Positions of Lodgepole Pine, and Its Within Element and Within Position Variation .................... 48 6, Mineral Content of Differently Aged Lodge­ pole Pine Needles, and Its Within Element and Within Age Variation . ........... 52 7. Mineral Content of Differently Aged Needles from Different Crown Positions of Lodgepole Pine, and Its Within Element and Within Age Variation .............. 53 8, P and Ca Contents of Larch Foliage and Needle Litter Collected at Different Times of Yea r ............. 58 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Viii TABLE PAGE 9, Nitrogen Content of Larch Foliage Collected on Different Dates ••.oooeoooeo» 64 10, Percent Content of Litter of Western Larch , . 67 11, Variability Between Trees (Variances) for Foliar Mineral Content of Larch and Lodgepole P i n e ............................ 72 12, Sample Size Required to Measure Mineral Content of Larch and Lodgepole Pine Foliage with a 95% Confidence Limit of + 0 . 1 % 73 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE PAGE 1. Seasonal Trends in Mineral Content of Spruce and Pine Foliage . .................... 14 2. Seasonal Trends in Mineral Content of Larch Foliage •....«•oo.o.o........... 41 3. Mineral Content of Foliage from Different Crown Positions of Larch 44 4. Seasonal Trend in Potassium Content of Lodgepole Pine Foliage 46 5. Mineral Content of Foliage from Different Crown Positions of Lodgepole Pine « . » o • 49 6. Mineral Content of Differently Aged Lodge­ pole Pine Needles ............................... 51 7. Amounts of Midsummer Foliage and Contents on a Comparable Larch and Lodgepole Pine ^^ree 53 8. Amounts of Needle Litter and Contents from an Average Tree and Returned to the Soil Annually by Young Larch and Lodgepole Pine Forests ODeoo»«ooooooA«ooo 60 9. Amounts of Minerals Returned to the Soil Annually by Forest Tree Leaves , . , . » . 62 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. I. INTRODUCTION During the past several decades this country has witnessed a tremendous increase in population, standard of living, industrial expansion, and a concommitant increase in demand for basic materials such as wood and wood products. This increased demand for forest products has caused a yearly increase in timber harvest in almost all of the timber producing states, including Montana, The area de­ voted to timber production, in spite of increasing demands for wood
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Chestnut Oak Shortleaf Pine
    Eastern Red Cedar (Juniperus virginiana) Chestnut Oak (Quercus prinus) The Need to Know: How Trees Grow Paul Wray Paul Wray Paul Paul Wray Paul Kentucky Forestry Kentucky Forestry The Eastern Red Cedar is actually in the juniper family and is not closely related Although its serrated leaves resemble those of an American chestnut, this tree to other cedars. Its tough, stringy bark and waxy, scaly needles are designed for is actually a species of oak. It is also referred to as rock oak because it likes to survival in very dry conditions. The berries of the red cedar are an important food grow in rocky areas. The bark of a chestnut oak has vertical rectangular chunks. source for many songbirds. The wood is prized by builders for its rich red color, Good acorn crops are infrequent, but when available, the sweet nuts are eaten by sweet smell, and weather-resistant properties. deer, wild turkeys, squirrels and chipmunks. Mountain Laurel (Kalmia latifolia) White Oak (Quercus alba) Paul Wray Paul Paul Wray Paul Richard Webb Richard This evergreen shrub can be found in a variety of habitats along Eastern North The leaves of the white oak have rounded lobes, and the bark is light gray and America. It has a gnarled, multi-stemmed trunk with ridged bark, and typically scaly on older trees. The acorns are elongated with a shallow cap, and have a grows as a rounded, dense shrub of 5-15 feet tall. The leaves are broad with sweet taste, which makes them a favorite food for deer, bear, turkeys, squirrels pointed tips, and the mountain laurel’s noteworthy cup-shaped flowers bloom in and other wildlife.
    [Show full text]
  • Current U.S. Forest Data and Maps
    CURRENT U.S. FOREST DATA AND MAPS Forest age FIA MapMaker CURRENT U.S. Forest ownership TPO Data FOREST DATA Timber harvest AND MAPS Urban influence Forest covertypes Top 10 species Return to FIA Home Return to FIA Home NEXT Productive unreserved forest area CURRENT U.S. FOREST DATA (timberland) in the U.S. by region and AND MAPS stand age class, 2002 Return 120 Forests in the 100 South, where timber production West is highest, have 80 s the lowest average age. 60 Northern forests, predominantly Million acreMillion South hardwoods, are 40 of slightly older in average age and 20 Western forests have the largest North concentration of 0 older stands. 1-19 20-39 40-59 60-79 80-99 100- 120- 140- 160- 200- 240- 280- 320- 400+ 119 139 159 199 240 279 319 399 Stand-age Class (years) Return to FIA Home Source: National Report on Forest Resources NEXT CURRENT U.S. FOREST DATA Forest ownership AND MAPS Return Eastern forests are predominantly private and western forests are predominantly public. Industrial forests are concentrated in Maine, the Lake States, the lower South and Pacific Northwest regions. Source: National Report on Forest Resources Return to FIA Home NEXT CURRENT U.S. Timber harvest by county FOREST DATA AND MAPS Return Timber harvests are concentrated in Maine, the Lake States, the lower South and Pacific Northwest regions. The South is the largest timber producing region in the country accounting for nearly 62% of all U.S. timber harvest. Source: National Report on Forest Resources Return to FIA Home NEXT CURRENT U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Trees on the Trails D Think of This 4-Page Insert As Your “Cheat Sheet” for the Trees Most Often Found Along Washington’S Trails
    trees canreach 300feettall. east of the crest. Old-growth forests drier in and forests rain western both in tree Abundant Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir Needles comeinsetsoftwo. abundance. in Cascades eastern known as shore pine) and in it’s (where crest of west Found Pinus contorta pine Lodgepole WASHINGTON WASHINGTON don’t betoodisappointedifyoucan’tgetapositiveI.D.onthatmysterytree. and fun, have So fall!). rarely and tree the in high stay (which cones the examine you unless distinguished be can’t firs Some apart. tell to tricky are trees some last, And Does itthriveeastofthecrest?craveshadeoropensunlight? elevations? higher prefer tree the Does tree? the is Where consider: to clues Other overall the both picture tree andadetailsuchasconesorneedlestohelpyouidentifythetree. to tried We’ve papery? or rough smooth, bark the Is like? look cones the do What leaves. or needles the Study trees: identify you help to tips few A the crest.Afew(suchasDouglas-fir)arefoundonbothsidesofdivide. of east only found are others while Cascades, the of crest the of west common are trees these of Some summits. subalpine to forests lowland from everywhere found trees deciduous flowering and conifers both find along you’ll Within, found trails. often Washington’s most trees the for sheet” “cheat your as insert 4-page this of Think Trees ontheTrails Trees TRAILS ALAN BAUER ALAN BAUER DAVE SCHIEFELBEIN ALAN BAUER very shadetolerant. below 3,500 feet, this tree is forests westside in Douglas-fir Second only in abundance to heterophylla Tsuga hemlock Western needles insetsoffive. cones, Large 1910. in troduced in disease a by decimated were Once common, populations Pinus monticola pine white Western August 2007 August - SUSAN MCDOUGAL SUSAN MCDOUGAL SYLVIA FEDER SUSAN MCDOUGAL come insetsofthree.
    [Show full text]
  • Northeastern Coastal and Interior Pine-Oak Forest
    Northeastern Coastal and Interior Pine-Oak Forest Macrogroup: Northern Hardwood & Conifer yourStateNatural Heritage Ecologist for more information about this habitat. This is modeledmap a distributiononbased current and is data nota substitute for field inventory. based Contact © Maine Natural Areas Program Description: A mixed forest dominated by white pine, red oak, and hemlock in varying proportions. Red maple and white and black oak are common associates, and northern hardwoods like white ash and American beech can appear as minor components. This forest of low to moderate moisture is usually closed canopy and can be heavily coniferous, with some nearly pure stands of white pine and red maple; hemlock is often more abundant in moister settings. This system type occurs over broad areas, but most of it is in early to mid-successional stages and heavily fragmented. It may well be that it is more widespread and abundant as a result of human occupation of and changes to the New State Distribution: CT, MA, ME, NH, RI England landscape. Total Habitat Acreage: 1,538,080 Ecological Setting and Natural Processes: Percent Conserved: 15.8% Usually occurs on flat to rolling glacial landscapes on State State GAP 1&2 GAP 3 Unsecured nutrient-poor, sandy substrates, and is often found near State Habitat % Acreage (acres) (acres) (acres) water or wetlands. Upper elevation limit is about 1000’ to NH 43% 654,780 12,748 89,778 552,254 1200’ (305-365m) in central Massachusetts and southern MA 26% 403,139 9,054 81,076 313,009 New Hampshire, but it is usually considerably lower.
    [Show full text]
  • Chestnut Oak Forest (White Pine Subtype)
    CHESTNUT OAK FOREST (WHITE PINE SUBTYPE) Concept: The White Pine Subtype encompasses lower elevation Quercus montana forests that have a significant component of Pinus strobus, which may range from a substantial minority to codominant in the canopy. The lower strata in this subtype appear to overlap the less extreme range of variation of the Dry Heath Subtype and the Herb Subtype. Distinguishing Features: Chestnut Oak Forest (White Pine Subtype) is distinguished from all other communities by the combination of Quercus montana with Pinus strobus, without a component of Quercus alba. The White Pine Subtype subtype should only be used where white pine is believed to be naturally present, not for forests where it has been planted or where it likely spread from nearby plantings. Forests with a more mesophytic composition, such as the forests of Quercus rubra and Pinus strobus with Rhododendron maximum that occur around Linville Falls, are treated as the Mesic Subtype. Synonyms: Pinus strobus - Quercus (coccinea, prinus) / (Gaylussacia ursina, Vaccinium stamineum) Forest (CEGL007519). Ecological Systems: Southern Appalachian Oak Forest (CES202.886). Sites: The White Pine Subtype occurs on open slopes and spur ridges. It often is in steep gorges or in the most rugged foothill ranges. Most example are at 1000-2500 feet elevation, but a few are reported upward to 4000 feet or even higher. Soils: Soils are generally Typic Dystrochrepts, especially Chestnut and Edneyville, less often Typic Hapludults such as Tate or Cowee. Hydrology: Sites are dry and well drained but may be somewhat less stressful because of topographic sheltering. Vegetation: The forest canopy is dominated by a mix of Pinus strobus and Quercus montana, occasionally with Quercus coccinea or Quercus rubra codominant.
    [Show full text]
  • What's Happening to Foothill Pine?
    What’s happeningW to Foothill Pine? USDA Forest Service, Forest Health Protection, South Sierra Shared Service Area Introduction Foothill Pine (Pinus sabiniana, also known as Grey pine) is a native California endemic pine that occurs between 1000 to 4000 feet in elevation. This unusual pine prefers to grow in open woodlands other than pine forests, which is why it is often found among buckeyes, oaks, and buckthorn of the foothills. In the past three years, residents in the Gold Country counties have noticed a significant decline of Foothill pine. Symptoms have been branch dieback, partial crown fade, or whole tree mortality. While these are typical symptoms of tree decline they are not diagnostic on any one causal agent. Recently, the numerous and rapid loss of trees has been startling and cause for concern. Little is known about the biology of the Grey pine. Our observations of where foothill pines have been fading has not yet allowed us to discern factors that may be causing this decline. While several damaging insects and pathogens have been previously identified, none (on their own) are considered primary factors of mortality. The primary bark beetles that attack Ponderosa or white firs are not the same ones that attack Foothill pine. Most of the insects that have been identified on Foothill pine are considered secondary insects that typically attack trees after trees are already dying. Dwarf mistletoe is the most common pest observed and severe infections will cause reduced growth, susceptibility to other pests, and eventually mortality. Common Insects found infesting Gray Pines Weather and forest stand conditions strongly influence behavior and population dynamics of the insects that attack the foothill pine.
    [Show full text]
  • Alternative Forest Management Practices for Montana
    Peter F Kolb, MSU Extension Forestry Specialist, Assistant Professor of Forest Ecology University of Montana, Missoula, MT 59812-0606 [email protected] Alternative Forest Management Practices for Montana The first step of any type of land management is to formulate a set of objectives and goals for the acreage in question. While these goals will reflect the personal needs of the landowner, which may include anything from minimizing human impacts to converting a forest into a pasture, they should also take into consideration the ecological capacity of the site. Throughout history, the biggest land management failures have occurred when managers tried to impose objectives that the land was incapable of supporting. With that in mind, all forested land management goals and objectives ultimately involve which trees should be left and which trees should be removed from a particular site. The most daunting challenge to the art and science of forestry is still represented by this basic decision making process, and can result in leaving all the trees or cutting every tree. To a forest landowner, setting objectives and goals for their land may be relatively simple compared to standing in the forest and trying to decide what actions to take. Ecology Montana forests are composed of a complex mosaic of ecologically distinct zones that were created by the interaction of topography, climate, soils and historic disturbance regimes on biological organisms. Depending on the location, this mosaic can occur across the landscape as an intricate puzzle of small 5-50 acre patches to larger 1000 – 10,000 acre patches.
    [Show full text]
  • Oak-Pine Barrens Community Abstract
    Oak-Pine Barrens Community Abstract Historical Range Photo by Patrick J. Comer Prevalent or likely prevalent Infrequent or likely infrequent Absent or likely absent Global and State Rank: G3/S2 0.3% of the state’s surface area (Comer et al. 1995). Most of this acreage was concentrated in Newaygo Range: Barrens and prairie communities reached their County (17% or 19,000 acres), Crawford County (15% maximum extent in Michigan approximately 4,000- or 17,000 acres) and Allegan County (14% or 15,000 6,000 years before present, when post-glacial climatic acres). Today merely a few hundred acres of high conditions were comparatively warm and dry. Dur- quality oak-pine barrens remain in Michigan. This rare ing this time, xerothermic conditions allowed for the community constitutes less than 0.005% of the present invasion of fire-dependent, xeric vegetation types into a vegetation, a sixty-fold reduction from the amount of large portion of the Lower Peninsula and into sections oak-pine barrens originally present. of the Upper Peninsula. With the subsequent shift of more mesic climatic conditions southward, there has Currently a few small remnants of oak-pine barrens been a recolonization of mesic vegetation throughout persist. Destructive timber exploitation of pines Michigan. The distribution of fire-dominated com- (1890s) and oaks (1920s) combined with post-logging munities, such as oak-pine barrens, has been reduced slash fires destroyed or degraded oak-pine barrens to isolated patches typically along the climatic tension across Michigan (Michigan Natural Features Inventory zone (Hauser 1953 in Lohrentz and Mattei 1995). In 1995).
    [Show full text]
  • Pine Wood Nematode in Green Coniferous Sawn Wood in Oregon
    UnHed States Department of Incidence ofthe Agriculture Pine Wood Nematode in Forest Service Green Coniferous Sawn Wood in Oregon and California Southeastern Forest Experiment Station Research Note L. David Dwinell SE-367 May 1993 Abstract The pine wood nematode is transmitted from one tree Samples of green sawn Douglas-fir, redwood, ponderosa pine, to another when its insect vector, Monochamus spp., and white fir were collected in August. and September 1992 lays its eggs in freshly cut, felled, dying, or recently from seven mills in Oregon and California, and assayed for the dead conifers, particularly pines (Wingfield 1983). In pine wood nemat.ode, Bursal'helenchus xylol'hilus. The nulls these cases, the nematode is a secondary associate and produced about 108 nLillion board feet during the survey period. not the cause of mortality. The result, however, is that The pine wood nematode was not found in any of the 424 samples of Douglas-fir, the 192 of redwood, or the 3 of white fir. the nematode may occasionally be present in green The nematode was recovered from 8 of 105 samples of green lumber, particularly pine (Dwinell 1990; Dwinell and ponderosa pine lumber from a nLill in Oregon. These eight Nickle 1989). samples cont.ained an average of 54 pine wood nematodes per gram of dry weight. This is the first report of the pine wood nematode in Oregon. There is a paucity of critical information on the Bursaphelenchus-Monochamus-conifer complex in Keywords: Bursaphelenchus xylophilus, Pseudotsl1ga menZleSIl, the Pacific Northwest. Monochamus scutellatus Sequoia s empervirens, Pinus ponderosa, Abies concolol', lumber, oregonensis LeConte, M .
    [Show full text]
  • The Identification of Douglas-Fir Wood
    UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE • FOREST SERVICE • FOREST PRODUCTS LABORATORY • MADISON 5 WIS May 1963 FPL-010 1 THE IDENTIFICATION OF DOUGLAS-FIR WOOD Douglas-fir is one of the largest, most abundant and widely distributed species of trees native to North America, and next to the southern yellow pines, it is cut in the greatest quantities of any wood of commercial importance. It be- longs to the coniferous family and is, therefore, a softwood. Other names for Douglas -fir are red fir, yellow fir, Oregon pine, Puget Sound pine, red pine, red spruce, and Douglas spruce. Its botanical name is Pseudotsuga menziesii (Mirb.) Franco. Although Douglas-fir is distinctly a western species, it also is used in many parts of the Middle West and East. It is used for structural timbers, railway ties, railway cars, rough and finish lumber, flooring, sash and doors, furniture, lath, cooperage, tanks, conduits, paving blocks, boxes, agricultural implements, and numerous other articles. The principal softwoods used for the same purposes are the southern yellow pines, Norway pine, eastern hemlock, western hemlock, Sitka spruce, ponderosa pine, western larch, and some of the balsam firs (principally white fir, lowland white fir, noble fir, and silver fir--all western species). As there is a considerable range in the price and suitability of these various woods for various purposes, it is important to be able to distinguish the wood of Douglas -fir from the others. Douglas-fir is a resinous wood, with a characteristic sweetish odor.. Exuda- tions of resin on end and side surfaces and pitch pockets are common.
    [Show full text]
  • Larch Dwarf Mistletoe-Management Strategies and General Marking
    Larch Dwarf Mistletoe-Management Strategies and General Marking Guide for Eastern Washington and the Blue Mountains, and Visual Guide to Determining Dwarf Mistletoe Rating (DMR) Craig L. Schmitt James S. Hadfield Forest Pathologist Forest Pathologist Blue Mountains Pest Management Wenatchee Insect and Disease Service Center Service Center Wallowa-Whitman NF Okanogan-Wenatchee NF Report BMPMSC-09-01 May 2009 INTRODUCTION Western larch (Larix occidentalis Nutt.), a conifer of very broad ecological amplitude, is distributed over a wide range of plant associations in the Blue Mountains. Johnson and Clausnitzer (1992) found larch in 8 subalpine fir series associations, all 16 grand fir series associations, 5 lodgepole pine series associations, 6 Douglas-fir series associations, and 2 ponderosa pine series associations. Larch can be found as a cohort with every Blue Mountain conifer with the exception of western juniper. Larch is a shade intolerant seral conifer that rapidly colonizes disturbed sites having exposed mineral soil if there is a viable seed source. However, seed production is variable, with good seed years interspersed with fair to poor years (Schmidt and Shearer 1990). As a result, poor regeneration can result if seed is not produced while mineral soil is exposed. Oftentimes in the Blue Mountains, late frosts severely damage larch seed crops. Insect damage caused by the western spruce budworm (Choristoneura occidentalis), which will feed on reproductive flowers, can substantially reduce seed production during periods of defoliation (Fellin and Dewey 1982). In post-disturbance environments, western larch will often dominate stocking in young stands, often as a cohort with lodgepole pine and lesser amounts of other conifers.
    [Show full text]
  • Long-Term Projections of the Natural Expansion of the Pine Wood Nematode in the Iberian Peninsula
    Article Long-Term Projections of the Natural Expansion of the Pine Wood Nematode in the Iberian Peninsula Begoña de la Fuente * and Santiago Saura MONTES (ETSI de Montes, Forestal y del Medio Natural), Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Ciudad Universitaria s/n, 28040 Madrid, Spain; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract: The invasive pine wood nematode (PWN), Bursaphelenchus xylophilus, causal agent of pine wilt disease, was first reported in Europe, near Lisbon, in 1999, and has since then spread to most of Portugal. We here modelled the spatiotemporal patterns of future PNW natural spread in the Iberian Peninsula, as dispersed by the vector beetle Monochamus galloprovincialis, using a process-based and previously validated network model. We improved the accuracy, informative content, forecasted period and spatial drivers considered in previous modelling efforts for the PWN in Southern Europe. We considered the distribution and different susceptibility to the PWN of individual pine tree species and the effect of climate change projections on environmental suitability for PWN spread, as we modelled the PWN expansion dynamics over the long term (>100 years). We found that, in the absence of effective containment measures, the PWN will spread naturally to the entire Iberian Peninsula, including the Pyrenees, where it would find a gateway for spread into France. The PWN spread will be relatively gradual, with an average rate of 0.83% of the total current Iberian pine forest area infected yearly. Climate was not found to be an important limiting factor for long-term PWN spread, because (i) there is ample availability of alternative pathways for PWN dispersal Citation: de la Fuente, B.; Saura, S.
    [Show full text]