DOCSLIB.ORG

White Pine Blister Rust General Ecology and Management

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
White Pine Blister Rust General Ecology and Management Insect and Disease Forest Health Protection and State Forestry Organizations Management Series 14.2 WEB 2013 White Pine Blister Rust John Schwandt, General Ecology and Management Holly Kearns, and James Byler Cronartium ribicola J.C.Fisch. in Rabh Forest Pathologists Forest Health Protection Conifer Hosts - All native five- This fungal disease was USDA Forest Service needled pines accidentally introduced from Alternate hosts - primarily Ribes Europe in early 1900s. Since then, Topics spp.(currants and gooseberries) it has devastated western white possibly Pedicularis spp. and pine forests in the northern and Introduction 1 Castilleja spp. central Rocky Mountains. Life Cycle 2 Identification 4 Introduction Management 6 Management of western white pine needled pines native to North Planting 7 (Pinus monticola) (WWP) has been America are susceptible (Hoff et al. Pruning 8 confounded by the introduction of 1980), but the Great Basin white pine blister rust (WPBR), Bristlecone pine (Pinus longaeva) is the Thinning 11 caused by the fungus Cronartium only pine host that has not yet been Prioritizing Stands 12 ribicola. This disease was introduced infected in its natural range (Nevada Excising Cankers 12 into the west coast of North America and Utah). The disease continues to Ribes Management 13 in the early 1900s on infected eastern spread and intensify throughout the WPBR Hazard 13 white pine seedlings grown in France range of its hosts and poses a threat (Hunt 2009). One documented to five-needled pines in Mexico. Monitoring 14 introduction was at Point Gray near Future 16 Vancouver, B.C. (Mielke 1943) but it In the Inland Northwest, WPBR is Literature Cited 17 is possible there were other now distributed throughout nearly all Tree Improvement Efforts 20 introductions along the West Coast of the ranges of all five-needled pine (Hunt 2009). All nine of the five- hosts in Idaho, Montana, and Rust Status Form 24 Pruning Priority Guide 25 Figure 1. Decline in western white pine forest type on Idaho Panhandle National Forests in Northern Idaho from 1930 to 1980. Key Points WPBR is caused by an introduced fungus with a complex life cycle WPBR attacks 5- needled pines of all sizes and ages Impacts can be reduced by a combination of treatments Periodic monitoring is critical. 14.2 White Pine Blister Rust Management Pa ge 2 western Wyoming. This includes million acres of western white pine whitebark pine (Pinus albicaulis) and cover type in the Inland Northwest Historic Facts limber pine (Pinus flexilis) as well as still carries a major component of western white pine. Western white western white pine (Fins et al. From 1925 to 1934 pine played a critical role in 2001). This loss of western white the average annual stabilizing ecological processes and pine has resulted in a major shift in harvest of western was also the most valuable timber historic forest succession pathways white pine from the species, dominating the timber (Fig. 1) (Samman et al. 2003). Inland Northwest was industry between 1900 and 1965 Western white pine has largely been 430 million board feet; (Fins et al. 2001). Unfortunately, replaced by Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga enough to build western white pine proved to be menziesii) and grand fir (Abies 43,000 homes per highly susceptible to WPBR with grandis), which are both much more mortality rates of 90 percent or susceptible to a variety of insects year. more in what were once vigorous, and diseases. well-stocked stands. Today, only 5 Five million acres of to 10 percent of the original 5 the Inland Northwest were once considered Life Cycle white pine cover type. Cronartium ribicola is an obligate par- wort (Pedicularis spp.) and Indian asite, which means it can only sur- paintbrush (Castilleja spp.) can also vive on living host tissue. It re- be infected, but their importance in quires two different hosts to com- spread and intensification of WPBR plete its complex life cycle (Fig. 2). has yet to be determined One host is a five-needled pine and (McDonald et al. 2006). the other is a shrub or herbaceous On white pine hosts, infections host referred to as the alternate must occur through the needles by host. Currants and gooseberries Rust Biology spores that come from an alternate WPBR requires 2 (Ribes spp.) are the primary alter- host usually late in the fall during hosts to complete nate hosts. Some species of louse- its life cycle Figure 2. Life cycle of white pine blister rust WPBR does not go from pine to pine WPBR cankers may be active even if: Not sporulating every year The branch has no foliage (and the canker is near the bole) Trees with severe stem cankers may still have good growth for many years 14.2 White Pine Blister Rust Management Pa ge 3 periods of high relative humidity. many miles to infect leaves of the Over 50% of the infections occur alternate hosts (Buchanan and on one-year old foliage, 25-30% on Kimmey 1938). 2-year old foliage, 10-15% on cur- rent year foliage and 5-10% on 3- year old foliage (Lachmund 1933). The following spring, small yellow needle spots form. The rust fungus grows through the branches about 2-inches per year toward the bole, killing tissue as it advances (Schwandt et al. 2013). Once it reaches the main stem, the fungus creates stem cankers that eventually Figure 4. Watery droplets of girdle the stem and cause top kill spermatia on WPBR canker. (Fig. 3) or mortality. All sizes of Figure 5. Characteristic blisters of aecia trees are attacked and small regen- erupting through the bark of a WPBR canker. The fungus builds up on the alter- nate host during the summer by producing urediniospores, which re- infect the same or adjacent alternate hosts. Usually in late summer the fungus produces teliospores on small hair-like projections on the underside of leaves of the alternate hosts (Fig. 6). During periods of high relative humidity, teliospores Figure 6. Hair-like telia on the produce thin-walled, delicate basidi- underside of the alternate host. ospores, which usually travel very short distances (a few hundred yards) to infect needles of white Figure 3. Top kill by multiple WPBR cankers. pines (Zambino 2010). On the al- ternate hosts, damage from WPBR eration can be killed rapidly. Gen- is usually confined to small leaf erally, the larger the tree is at the spots (Fig. 7), but premature defoli- time it becomes infected, the long- ation may occur if they are severely er it survives after infection. infected. About once every ten During the late summer, spermatia years conditions are highly favora- (pycniospores) are produced on the ble and a “wave year” of infections pine hosts near canker margins in occurs. It is unknown if this is due watery droplets (Fig. 4) which in- to: an early moist spring that would sects then carry from canker to favor early aecia production; and/or canker resulting in fertilization of a cool moist summer that would the rust fungus. The following favor spread and intensification on spring, cankers on white pine may the alternate hosts; and/or a pro- Figure 7. Small leaf spots on Ribes produce characteristic yellow- longed warm, moist fall that would caused by WPBR infections. orange blister-like aecia that erupt favor basidiospore production and through the bark (Fig. 5). Aecio- spread before frost causes Ribes to spores from these blisters can travel shed their leaves. 14.2 White Pine Blister Rust Management Pa ge 4 Symptoms Identification Dead branch “flags” There are several signs and symp- to recognize than others. It is also toms associated with WPBR can- important to look at many trees in a Swollen or kers that can help in making an ac- stand, since it is highly unlikely to discolored areas curate diagnosis. The most obvious find only a single infected tree in a Prolific pitching sign is the presence of aecial blisters stand. erupting through the bark near the Rodent chewing canker margin (Fig. 5). These blis- Once the fungus girdles the branch Roughened, ters and their papery remnants that or stem, it effectively kills the tis- cracked bark may remain most of the summer are sues beyond the canker resulting in a positive diagnosis that a tree is in- distinctive “flags” (Fig. 8) or top- Insect boring fected with WPBR. Unfortunately, activity aecia are not produced until at least 3-5 years after foliage infection, and may not be produced every year. A study that monitored nearly 200 individual cankers annually for 10 years, found individual cankers only sporulated an average of 1.2 times even though cankers were continu- ing to expand every year (Schwandt et al. 2013). During this period the total number of sporulating cankers per year varied from less than 10 to over 700 on 48 monitored trees. Figure 8. Distinctive branch flag caused by Another positive sign is the pres- WPBR. ence of the watery spermatial drop- lets that may form during the sum- mer near the canker margin (Fig. 4). kill (Fig. 3). Most bole cankers are Figure 9. Typical diamond shaped bole canker after light These are much less obvious than diamond shaped with a distinct yel- scrubbing with water. aecia, but if present are indicative of low/orange margin that is best seen WPBR infection. Production of when moistened or lightly scrubbed spermatia is also sporadic, which with water (Figs. 9 and 10). Large may help explain the inconsistent stem cankers often produce copi- production of aecia since it is ous amounts of pitch (Fig. 11) that thought that aecia are only pro- tend to “glue” bark to older dead duced on cankers that produce trees that have sloughed off much spermatia the prior year (Baxter of their bark.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • PCBR 1956.Pdf (858.1Kb)
    UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Forest Service Region One BR REPORTS Annual - 1956 WHITE PINE BLISTER RUST CONTROL Calendar Year 1956 INF. IV. National Park Program I. Highlights of the 1956 Season The 1956 objectives of the National Park Service Region II white pine blister rust control program were accomplished. The program was planned and conducted as in previous years according to the cooperative arrangements between the Na- tional Park Service and the U. S. Forest Service. National Park Service personnel participating: Glacier Elmer Fladniark, chief ranger *A. D. Cannavina, s~pervisory park ranger Paul Webb, district ranger Yellowstone Otto Brown, chief ranger •~H. o. Edwards, assistant chief ranger Rocky Mountain: Harry During, chief ranger ->~Merle Stitt, staff ranger Grand Teton '-'"Ernest K. Field, chief r~ger Maynard Barrows, National Park Service consulting forester U. s .. forest Service· representatives: ~John C. Gynn, forester C. M. Chapman, forester The Na tionai Park Service Director approves new areas for -control. In January 1956, John c. Gynn met with National Park Service Region II Director Howard w. Baker, Regional Forester Frank ff. Childs, Fore:ster Maynard Barrows, and other members of their .s-taff at Omaha, "Nebraska, to review the results of the 1955 white pine and ribes survey on l7,270 acres of National Park lands. The group deter- mined ·the following areas should be incl\Jded in the pro;gram and the areas were later approved by the Director of the National Park Service. ~15- Glacier - expanded protection zones to present control areas only. Unit Acres Park Headquarters 300 East Glacier (Rising Sun Campground) 370 Twd Medicine 200 Total 870 Yellowstone New Unit Antelope Creek 1,390 Canyon 11,470 Fishing Bridge 2,090 Craig Pass (extension) 5,240 Total 20,190 Grand Teton New Unit Snake River (De adman 's Bar) 1,010 Grand Total 22,070 New areas surveyed at Roc~Mounta~~· At the request of Superintendent James V.
    [Show full text]
  • Stuart, Trees & Shrubs
    Excerpted from ©2001 by the Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved. May not be copied or reused without express written permission of the publisher. click here to BUY THIS BOOK INTRODUCTION HOW THE BOOK IS ORGANIZED Conifers and broadleaved trees and shrubs are treated separately in this book. Each group has its own set of keys to genera and species, as well as plant descriptions. Plant descriptions are or- ganized alphabetically by genus and then by species. In a few cases, we have included separate subspecies or varieties. Gen- era in which we include more than one species have short generic descriptions and species keys. Detailed species descrip- tions follow the generic descriptions. A species description in- cludes growth habit, distinctive characteristics, habitat, range (including a map), and remarks. Most species descriptions have an illustration showing leaves and either cones, flowers, or fruits. Illustrations were drawn from fresh specimens with the intent of showing diagnostic characteristics. Plant rarity is based on rankings derived from the California Native Plant Society and federal and state lists (Skinner and Pavlik 1994). Two lists are presented in the appendixes. The first is a list of species grouped by distinctive morphological features. The second is a checklist of trees and shrubs indexed alphabetically by family, genus, species, and common name. CLASSIFICATION To classify is a natural human trait. It is our nature to place ob- jects into similar groups and to place those groups into a hier- 1 TABLE 1 CLASSIFICATION HIERARCHY OF A CONIFER AND A BROADLEAVED TREE Taxonomic rank Conifer Broadleaved tree Kingdom Plantae Plantae Division Pinophyta Magnoliophyta Class Pinopsida Magnoliopsida Order Pinales Sapindales Family Pinaceae Aceraceae Genus Abies Acer Species epithet magnifica glabrum Variety shastensis torreyi Common name Shasta red fir mountain maple archy.
    [Show full text]
  • SCIENCE Biodiversityand SUSTAINABLE FORESTRY
    SCIENCE BIODIVERSITYand SUSTAINABLE FORESTRY A FINDINGS REPORT OF THE National Commission on Science for Sustainable Forestry A Program Conducted by the National Council for Science and the Environment Improving the scientific basis for environmental decisionmaking NCSE The mission of the National Commission on Science for Sustainable Forestry (NCSSF or Commission) is to improve the NCSSF operates under the scientific basis for developing, implementing, and evaluating sustainable auspices of the National forestry in the United States. Council for Science and The Commission is an independent, non-advocacy, multi-stakeholder the Environment (NCSE), body that plans and oversees the NCSSF program. It includes 16 leading a non-advocacy, not-for-profit scientists and forest management professionals from government, indus- organization dedicated to improving the scientific basis try, academia, and environmental organizations—all respected opinion for environmental decision leaders in diverse fields with broad perspectives. Members serve as making. individuals rather than as official representatives of their organizations. The Commission convenes at least twice a year to plan and oversee NCSE promotes interdiscipli- the program. Members’ names and affiliations are listed on page 2. nary research that connects The primary goal of the NCSSF program is to build a better scientific the life, physical, and social underpinning for assessing and improving sustainable forest management sciences and engineering. practices. The program strives to produce information and tools of the highest technical quality and greatest relevancy to improving forest Communication and outreach policy, management, and practice. are integral components of The initial five-year phase of the program focuses on the relationship these collaborative research between biodiversity and sustainable forest management.
    [Show full text]
  • Pinus Monticola Doulg. Ex D. Don Family: Pinaceae Western White Pine
    Pinus monticola Doulg. Ex D. Don Family: Pinaceae Western White Pine The genus Pinus is composed of about 100 species native to temperate and tropical regions of the world. Wood of pine can be separated microscopically into the white, red and yellow pine groups. The word pinus is the classical Latin name. The word monticola means inhabiting mountains. Other Common Names: Berg-tall, Columbia pijn, finger-cone pine, Idaho white pine, little sugar pine, mountain pine, mountain white pine, Norway white pine, pin argente, pin argente americain, pino bianco americano, pino blanco americano, silver pine, soft pine, vasterns Weymouth-tall, western white pine, Weymouth berg-pijn, Weymouth mountain pine, white pine, yellow pine. Distribution: Western white pine is native to the mountains ffrom northwestern Montana, extreme southwestern Alberta and southern British Columbia, south to Washington, Oregon and California through the Sierra Nevada to western Nevada and central California. The Tree: Western white pine trees reach heights of 180 feet, with a clear bole for 70 to 100 feet and diameters of 3.5 feet. Over mature trees may reach heights of 197 feet, with diameters of almost 6 feet. They may grow for 300 to 400 years. General Wood Characteristics: The sapwood of western white pine is nearly white to pale yellow, while the heartwood is cream to light reddish brown and may turn darker upon exposure. The wood has a slight resinous odor, but no characteristic taste. It is straight grained and has a rather coarse texture. It is also soft, light, is moderately weak in bending, moderately strong in end compression and moderately low in shock resistance.
    [Show full text]
  • Recovery Plan for Scots Pine Blister Rust Caused by Cronartium Flaccidum
    Recovery Plan for Scots Pine Blister Rust caused by Cronartium flaccidum (Alb. & Schwein.) G. Winter and Peridermium pini (Pers.) Lév. [syn. C. asclepiadeum (Willd.) Fr., Endocronartium pini (Pers.) Y. Hiratsuka] March 12 2009 Contents page –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– Executive Summary 2 Contributors and Reviewers 4 I. Introduction 4 II. Symptoms 5 III. Spread 6 IV. Monitoring and Detection 7 V. Response 8 VI. USDA Pathogens Permits 9 VII. Economic Impact and Compensation 10 VIII. Mitigation and Disease Management 11 IX. Infrastructure and Experts 14 X. Research, Extension, and Education Priorities 15 References 17 Web Resources 20 Appendix 21 –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– This recovery plan is one of several disease-specific documents produced as part of the National Plant Disease Recovery System (NPDRS) called for in Homeland Security Presidential Directive Number 9 (HSPD-9). The purpose of the NPDRS is to insure that the tools, infrastructure, communication networks, and capacity required for mitigating impacts of high-consequence, plant-disease outbreaks are in place so that a reasonable level of crop production is maintained. Each disease-specific plan is intended to provide a brief primer on the disease, assess the status of critical recovery components, and identify disease management research, extension, and education needs. These documents are not intended to be stand-alone documents that address all of the many and varied aspects of plant disease outbreak and all of the decisions that must be made and actions taken to achieve effective response and recovery. They are, however, documents that will help USDA guide further efforts directed toward plant disease recovery. 1 Executive Summary Scots pine blister rust (caused by the fungi Cronartium flaccidum and Peridermium pini) infects many Eurasian pines including Pinus sylvestris (Scots pine), Pinus pinaster, P.
    [Show full text]
  • Whitebark Pine Status and the Potential Role of Biotechnology in Restoration Diana F
    Whitebark Pine Status and the Potential Role of Biotechnology in Restoration Diana F. Tomback Dept. Integrative Biology University of Colorado Denver Webinar, Committee on Forest Health and Biotechnology, NASEM, April 2, 2018. Outline of presentation • Distribution • Four case histories illustrating the threat posed by • ESA status review Cronartium ribicola • Ecology • Restoration approaches • Foundation and • How biotechnology can expedite restoration efforts keystone roles • The National Whitebark Pine Restoration Plan • Threats and trends. Willmore Wilderness Park, Alberta, Canada Taxonomy: Pinus albicaulis Engelm., whitebark pine Family Pinaceae, Genus Pinus, Subgenus Strobus, Section Quinquefoliae.* • Subsect. Strobus -“five-needle pines” (revised)*. • Most recent phylogenies for subgenus Strobus constructed from nuclear, mitochondrial, and chloroplast gene sequences show diverse affinities between P. albicaulis and species native to North America, Asia, or Europe (Hao et al. 2015). • Hao et al. (2015)—“…ancient and relatively recent introgressive hybridization events…particularly in northeastern Asia and northwestern North America.” Genome of whitebark pine characterized as extremely large and highly repetitive. *New Subsect. Strobus from combined subsects. Strobus and Cembrae, Gernandt et al. 2005; Syring et al. 2007. Whitebark pine range • Upper subalpine and treeline forest zones. • Western U.S. and Canada. • 96% of the U.S. distribution is on federally owned/managed lands. • 37o to 55o N lat. • 107o to 128o W long. • Elevation:
    [Show full text]
  • Identifying Old Trees and Forests
    Identifying Old Trees and Forests IN EASTERN WASHINGTON by Robert Van Pelt Acknowledgements This guide is a companion to Identifying Mature and Old Forests in Western Washing- ton (Van Pelt, 2007). It was conceived in response to the work of the Old Growth Definition Committee. The committee was convened at the request of the Washington State Legisla- ture to map and inventory old growth forests on state trust lands managed by DNR. In the course of the committee’s work, the need became apparent for field guidance to assist field personnel in identifying individual old trees and forests. It is essential to acknowledge the people I worked with on the Old Growth Definition Com- mittee: Dr. Jerry F. Franklin, Dr. Miles Hemstrom, Joe Buchanan, Rex Crawford, Steve Curry, Sabra Hull, and Walt Obermeyer, all of whom contributed to the concepts which form the basis of this guide. Many people reviewed the text during its various iterations, which greatly contributed to improvements in both readability and scientific content: Richard Bigley Jerry Franklin Andrew Larson Ron Brightman Keala Hagman Jim Lutz Joe Buchanan Miles Hemstrom Tami Miketa Angie Cahill Sabra Hull Bob Redling Chris Earle Arthur Jacobson Jeff Ricklefs The layout and design of this guide was ably and beautifully conducted by Nancy Charbonneau and Jane Chavey of the DNR Communications Group. Photos, maps, and drawings by author except where indicated otherwise. Washington State Department of Natural Resources This guide was produced under contract as part of the ongoing research and application of new information to inform both land management and resource protection goals of Washington’s Department of Natural Resources.
    [Show full text]
  • First Report of the White Pine Blister Rust Fungus, Cronartium Ribicola, On
    Alternaria was isolated from the lesions. The pathogen was isolated on potato dextrose agar (PDA) media. On PDA. the fungus grew slowly with colonies reaching approximately 35 to 40 mm in diameter in 7 days when incubated at 30°C. Conidiophores arose singly or in groups, straight or First Report of the White Pine Blister Rust Fungus, Cronartium flexous. cylindrical, septate, pale to olivaceous brown, as much as 155 pm ribicola, on Pedicularis bracteosa. P. J. Zambino, B. A. Richardson, and long, 4 to 5.5 pm thick; conidia were straight, obclavate, pale olivaceous G. I. McDonald. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, brown, smooth, with up to 15 transverse and rarely 1 or 2 longitudinal or Moscow. ID 83843. Plant Dis. 91:467, 2007; published online as oblique septa and measured 50 to 115 x 5 to 10 pm. Pathogenicity tests doi:10.1094/PDIS-91-4-0467A.Accepted for publication 26 December were carried out three times on 6-month-old plants (n = 10). Plants were 2006. sprayed with a conidial suspension of lo5 conidialml; control plants were sprayed with sterilized water. Plants were covered with polyethylene bags Until recently, Cronarrium ribicola J.C. Fisch. was thought to utilize for 10 days. Disease symptoms appeared after 12 i- 1 day after inoculation. only Ribes spp. (Grossulariaceae) as telial hosts in North America. During Symptoms on the leaves were similar to those of a naturally occurring 2004, Pedicularis racemosa Dougl. ex Benth. and Casrilleja miniata diseased plant. The fungal pathogen was consistently reisolated from Dougl. (Orobanchaceae) were proven as natural telial hosts at a subalpine inoculated plants.
    [Show full text]
  • White Pine Blister Rust in the Interior Mountain West
    White Pine Blister Rust in the Interior Mountain West Kelly Burns1, Jim Blodgett, Dave Conklin, Brian Geils, Jim Hoffman, Marcus Jackson, William Jacobi, Holly Kearns and Anna Schoettle Introduction and Rocky Mountain Regions (Colorado, Wyoming, White pine blister rust is an exotic, invasive disease South Dakota, and Nebraska), and the eastern of white, stone, and foxtail pines (also referred to as portion of the Northern Region (central Montana white pines or five-needle pines) in the genus Pinus and North Dakota) (see Fig. 2). The infection front and subgenus Strobus (Price and others 1998). lies within this region and a large portion of its Cronartium ribicola, the fungus that causes WPBR, susceptible white pine population has not been requires an alternate host - currants and gooseberries challenged by the disease. This publication provides in the genus Ribes and species of Pedicularis and some background on the high elevation hosts and Castilleja (McDonald and others 2006, Zambino and others 2007) - to complete its life cycle. White pine synthesizes current information onthe distribution blister rust was discovered in western North and impacts of white pine blister rust in these more America in 1921. It is thought that the disease was recently infested areas. A summary of current and accidentally introduced on infected eastern white ongoing efforts for managing the disease is also pine (Pinus strobus) nursery stock shipped to provided. Vancouver, BC from Europe in the early 1900s but the specific details are unclear. Since then, the disease has spread throughout the distributions of most western white pines. Although all of the North American white pine species are susceptible to white pine blister rust (Bingham 1972, Hoff and others 1980), it was once thought that the remote, dry habitats occupied by the noncommercial, high elevation white pines would not support rust establishment.
    [Show full text]
  • Ecology of Whitebark Pine in the Pacific Northwest
    USDA Forest Service R6-NR-FHP-2007-01 Ecology of Whitebark Pine in the Pacific Northwest Gregory J. Ettl College of Forest Resources, University of Washington Box 352100 Seattle, WA 98195 Whitebark pine (Pinus albicaulis) is found in the subalpine zone throughout the Coastal, Olympic, Cascade, and Klamath Mountains, extending well into California at high elevations along the Sierra Nevada. Precipitation is > 300 cm/yr on the western slopes of the Coastal Mountains in British Columbia and the Olympics & Washington Cascades (Franklin and Dyrness 1988). Precipitation generally decreases along the Oregon Cascades moving south, with 50-100 cm/yr common in southern Oregon. The coastal mountain ranges in southern Oregon and Northern California, including the Siskiyou, Trinity, and Klamath Mountain ranges also receive precipitation upwards of 300 cm/yr, decreasing to 150-200 cm/yr throughout much of the California Cascades and northern Sierra Nevada (Schoenherr 1992). In the coastal ranges and Cascade ranges of British Columbia, Washington, and northern Oregon heavy precipitation leads to persistent snowpack, and therefore whitebark pine is often restricted to exposed ridges of the subalpine zone or drier sites in the rain shadow of these ranges where it commonly grows in association with subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa), Engelmann spruce (Picea engelmannii), and lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta). Whitebark pine is also a minor component of moister subalpine sites, or in mixed subalpine forests at lower elevations. Moister subalpine sites west of the Cascade crest in the southern Washington and northern Oregon Cascades have mountain hemlock (Tsuga mertensiana) and whitebark pine in association on some of the highest and most exposed slopes (Diaz et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Silvics of Western White Pine
    This file was created by scanning the printed publication. Errors identified by the software have been corrected; however, some errors may remain. SILVIGS of WESTERN WHITE PINE Misc. Pub. No. 26 November 1962 SILVICS OF WESTERN WHITE PINE By Charles A. Wellner Forester INTERMOUNTAIN FOREST AND RANGE EXPERIMENT STATION Forest Service U.S. Department of Agriculture Ogden, Utah Joseph F. Pechanec, Director CONTENTS Page DISTRIBUTION 1 HABITAT CONDITIONS 1 Climatic 1 Edaphic 2 Physiographic 3 Biotic 4 LIFE HISTORY 5 Seeding habits 5 Vegetative reproduction 8 Germination 8 Seedling development 9 Sapling stage to maturity 10 RACIAL VARIATION 13 SPECIAL FEATURES 14 Nutrient content of leaf litter 14 Physical and chemical composition of tuipentine 14 LITERATURE CITED 15 i . SILVICS OF WESTERN WHITE PINE By Charles A. Wellner-^ Western white pine (Pinus monticola), the state tree of Idaho, is frequently called "Idaho white pine" or just "white pine" and occasionally "silver pine" or "mountain Weymouth pine" (13^, 59, 86)^/ DISTRIBUTION Western white pine grows along west coast mountain ranges from Vancouver Island and the Homathko River on the adjacent mainland in British Columbia south- ward to the San Bernardino Mountains of southern California (13, 65, 75, 83). In the interior its range is from Quesnel Lake through the Selkirk Mountains of British Columbia southward into northern Idaho, western Montana, and northeastern Washington and also into the Blue Mountains of southeastern Washington and north- eastern Oregon (13, 52, 65, 75, 83). The species attains its greatest size and reaches its best stand and commercial development in northern Idaho and adjacent sections of Montana, Washington, and British Columbia (1, 48).
    [Show full text]
  • Conservation Genetics of High Elevation Five-Needle White Pines
    Conservation Genetics of High Elevation Five-Needle White Pines Conservation Genetics of High Elevation Five-Needle White Pines Andrew D. Bower, USDA Forest Service, Olympic National Forest, Olympia, WA; Sierra C. McLane, University of British Columbia, Dept. of Forest Sciences, Vancouver, BC; Andrew Eckert, University of California Davis, Section of Plenary Paper Evolution and Ecology, Davis, CA; Stacy Jorgensen, University of Hawaii at Manoa, Department of Geography, Manoa, HI; Anna Schoettle, USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, CO; Sally Aitken, University of British Columbia, Dept. of Forest Sciences, Vancouver, BC Abstract—Conservation genetics examines the biophysical factors population structure using molecular markers and quanti- influencing genetic processes and uses that information to conserve tative traits and assessing how these measures are affected and maintain the evolutionary potential of species and popula- by ecological changes. Genetic diversity is influenced by the tions. Here we review published and unpublished literature on the evolutionary forces of mutation, selection, migration, and conservation genetics of seven North American high-elevation drift, which impact within- and among-population genetic five-needle pines. Although these species are widely distributed across much of western North America, many face considerable diversity in differing ways. Discussions of how these forces conservation challenges: they are not valued for timber, yet they impact genetic diversity can be found in many genetics texts have high ecological value; they are susceptible to the introduced (for example Frankham and others 2002; Hartl and Clark disease white pine blister rust (caused by the fungus Cronartium 1989) and will not be discussed here. ribicola) and endemic-turned-epidemic pests; and some are affect- ed by habitat fragmentation and successional replacement by other Why Is Genetic Diversity Important? species.
    [Show full text]