Pine Butterfly (Neophasia Menapia) Outbreak in the Malheur National Forest, Blue Mountains, Oregon: Examining Patterns of Defoliation
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF Ariadne T. DeMarco for the degree of Master of Science in Sustainable Forest Management presented on March 21, 2014. Title: Pine Butterfly (Neophasia menapia) Outbreak in the Malheur National Forest, Blue Mountains, Oregon: Examining Patterns of Defoliation Abstract approved: David C. Shaw The pine butterfly (Neophasia menapia C. Felder & R. Felder) (Lepidoptera: Pieridae) is a relatively host-specific defoliator of ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa Dougl. ex Laws). From 2008 to 2012, the Malheur National Forest was subject to an outbreak of pine butterfly in ponderosa pine, peaking at ~100,000 ha of forest visibly defoliated in 2011. Silvicultural- based management guidelines have been used to manage stand resilience to other insect defoliators, but guidelines specific to the pine butterfly are currently lacking. The goal of this study is to examine pine butterfly defoliation patterns to relate stand and tree structure characteristics to inform management guidelines. I randomly sampled 25 stands within ponderosa pine forests delineated as heavily defoliated in 2011 by annual forest health aerial surveys. Within each stand I randomly located three transect plots, 10 x 40m, and measured diameter at breast height (DBH), height, and estimated defoliation for the entirety of all trees > 5cm DBH. Data was analyzed using linear mixed effects models to account for all other determinants of defoliation before measuring variables under study. Defoliation averaged 67% for all trees. Stand density index, stand structure, tree crown class, and level within a tree canopy demonstrated no meaningful effects on mean defoliation. I infer from these results that defoliation levels during pine butterfly outbreaks are not influenced by structural or crown characteristics; virtually all available foliage is consumed in these single host-species stands (though note that ~10% of trees studied showed <50% defoliation levels). This suggests that the most relevant factor to managers interested in reducing tree mortality and growth loss may prove to be individual tree health prior to an outbreak. Therefore, standard silvicultural recommendations of thinning ponderosa pine to reduce competition and increase tree vigor and resilience is likely to be a good course in areas that are prone to pine butterfly outbreaks, although the best available information suggests that thinning should not be conducted during an outbreak. ©Copyright by Ariadne T. DeMarco March 21, 2014 All Rights Reserved Pine Butterfly (Neophasia menapia) Outbreak in the Malheur National Forest, Blue Mountains, Oregon: Examining Patterns of Defoliation by Ariadne T. DeMarco A THESIS submitted to Oregon State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science Presented March 21, 2014 Commencement June 2014 Master of Science thesis of Ariadne T. DeMarco presented on March 21, 2014. APPROVED: Major Professor, representing Sustainable Forest Management Head of the Department of Forest Engineering, Resources, and Management Dean of the Graduate School I understand that my thesis will become part of the permanent collection of Oregon State University libraries. My signature below authorizes release of my thesis to any reader upon request. Ariadne T. DeMarco, Author ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank my advisor, Dave Shaw, whose abilities and interests as a naturalist inspire me. His faith in my abilities never appeared to waiver. I would like to thanks Rob Flowers, whose generous help allowed me many opportunities, and whose sense of humor gave me perspective on the research process. Chris Marshall gave me my first insect job, and his high standards and passion for entomology help me to do better work. Andy Moldenke’s ways of thinking about ecology continue to influence me; he is largely responsible for my undertaking graduate research. Paulette Bierzychudek taught me to think critically about science; and Greta Binford inspired my interest in entomology. I would like to thank my friends and family for their support through this process, especially Alex Martin, for exceptional understanding, and Sam Colby, for help with all things. I would also like to thank Michelle Agne, for being a great example of a co-grad student, and Alex Wick, for superior nutrition in the field. Zhian Kamvar always agreed to help me with R. Thanks to my family members, who have been excited to hear the latest developments in butterfly research for the last two years. CONTRIBUTION OF AUTHORS Mike Thompson, Jon Laine, and Alex Wick assisted with data collection for this project. Dave Shaw, Rob Flowers, and Lia Speigel secured the grant that funded this research, and provided materials for field work. Dave Shaw assisted with study design for Chapter 2 and provided feedback at all stages of the process. Ariel Muldoon provided essential statistical assistance and encouragement. TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1: General Page Introduction………………………………………………………………………………..1 Literature Cited ............................................................................................................................ 8 Chapter 2: Pine Butterfly (Neophasia menapia) Outbreak in the Malheur National Forest, Blue Mountains, Oregon: Examining Patterns of Defoliation .......................................... 10 Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 10 Methods ..................................................................................................................................... 15 Study area ....................................................................................................................................................... 16 Stand selection ............................................................................................................................................. 17 Sampling protocol ....................................................................................................................................... 18 Indices of stand structure ........................................................................................................................ 19 Data analysis ................................................................................................................................................. 19 Results ....................................................................................................................................... 21 SDI and Stand Structural Relationships to Defoliation ................................................................ 22 Crown Class Relationships to Defoliation ......................................................................................... 23 Vertical Patterns of Defoliation ............................................................................................................. 24 Discussion .................................................................................................................................. 25 SDI and Stand Structural Relationships With Defoliation .......................................................... 26 Crown Class Relationships with Defoliation .................................................................................... 27 Vertical Crown Patterns of Defoliation .............................................................................................. 28 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) Management Implications ......................................................................................................... 30 Literature Cited .......................................................................................................................... 33 Chapter 3. General Conclusions ....................................................................................... 48 Future research .......................................................................................................................... 49 Broader impacts ......................................................................................................................... 49 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 2.1. Study area map. ………………………..………………………………………………………….37 2.2a. Diameter distribution plots of even-structured stands. ………………………...…………...38 2.2b. Diameter distribution plots of mixed-structure stands. ……………………………………..39 2.2c. Diameter distribution plots of uneven-structured stands. ………………………………….40 2.3. Seventy-two trees with defoliation values <50%.…………….……………………...…………41 2.4. Defoliation by crown class group………………….………………………….…………………......42 2.5. Defoliation by crown thirds. ………………………….………………………….….…………...……43 LIST OF TABLES Table Page 2.1. Characteristics of 25 stands sampled in Malheur National Forest, Oregon. …….44 2.2. Structure groups: sample sizes, mean defoliation, and 95% CI on the mean……....45 2.3. Crown class: sample sizes, marginal mean defoliation values, and standard error on the marginal mean. ………………………………………………………..………………………..46 2.4. Linear hypotheses of group means by crown thirds. ……………………………….…....47 LIST OF APPENDIX FIGURES Figure Page 1.1 Defoliation guide used during sampling. ……………………………………………54 LIST OF APPENDIX TABLES Table Page 1.1 Crown classes for live trees (Helms 1998)……………………….... …………….....55 1.2 Physiography codes (Natural Resource Inventory, USDA 2002)..……………..…...56 1.3 AIC table for SDI and structure base model selection….…...………………….…...57 1.4 AIC for crown class base model