Effects of Early Release on Natural Versus Container Loblolly Pines 12 Years After Field Establishment

Genetically improved, container loblolly pine (Pinus taeda L.) seedlings were compared to naturally established loblolly seedlings on a cutoverpine site. Crop pines on 6 of 12plots were releasedfrom woody and herbaceous competition within a 2 ft radius of each stem. On release plots, woody competition was controlled by hand-cutting for 5 consecutive yr and herbaceous competition was controlled with herbicidesfor 4 consecutive yr ufterpine establishment. Competition control increased 12 yr survival by 68 percentage points~for natural pines and by 47percentage points for planted pines. Twelve years afterfield establishment, mean-tree volume ofplantedpines was no different than that of naturally established pines. Nevertheless, volume gains of 150% to 200% were achieved within regeneration techniques as a result of

[1]  J. P. Barnett,et al.  Five-year field comparison of naturally regenerated Pinus taeda L. to genetically improved container stock, with and without release , 1994, New Forests.

[2]  M. Shelton,et al.  Natural Loblolly and Shortleaf Pine Productivity Through 53 Years of Management under Four Reproduction Cutting Methods , 2001 .

[3]  M. Shelton,et al.  Twenty Years of Natural Loblolly and Shortleaf Pine Seed Production on the Crossett Experimental Forest in Southeastern Arkansas , 2001 .

[4]  C. Wood,et al.  COMPETITION AMONG SECONDARY-SUCCESSIONAL PINE COMMUNITIES: A FIELD STUDY OF EFFECTS AND RESPONSES , 1999 .

[5]  J. P. Barnett,et al.  An 8-year field comparison of naturally seeded to planted container Pinus taeda, with and without release. , 1996 .

[6]  P. Dougherty,et al.  Spot-Size of Herbaceous Control Impacts Loblolly Pine Seedling Survival and Growth , 1991 .

[7]  J. Haywood,et al.  A Regional Study on the Influence of Woody and Herbaceous Competition on Early Loblolly Pine Growth , 1991 .

[8]  M. D. Cain.  The Influence of Woody and Herbaceous Competition on Early Growth of Naturally Regenerated Loblolly and Shortleaf Pines , 1991 .

[9]  J. P. Barnett,et al.  Growth and physiological response of four shortleaf pine families to herbicidal control of herbaceous competition , 1991 .

[10]  M. D. Cain.  Importance of Seedyear, Seedbed, and Overstory for Establishment of Natural Loblolly and Shortleaf Pine Regenerationin Southern Arkansas , 1991 .

[11]  William F. Watson,et al.  Costs and cost trends for forestry practices in the South , 1987 .

[12]  J. Haywood.  Response of planted Pinus taeda L. to brush control in Northern Louisana , 1986 .

[13]  T. Clason.  Hardwood eradication improves productivity of thinned loblolly pine stands , 1984 .

[14]  M. D. Cain,et al.  Annual brush control increases early growth of loblolly pine. , 1980 .