GENETIC VARIATION IN EASTERN WHITE PINE
FROM THE SOUTHERN APPALACHIAN MOUNTAINS

Thesis for the Degree of M. S.
MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
RAY JEROME AMIEL
1977

£19
iifixfiihifi $33: "‘. " *‘

<I§$lI§IeI;Iggfi I'f4;?:',:xggigi§;: ; ‘ :.,:;,'. . , A .
" - a. ‘ . ' ’ ' I . a . E . ‘ . ' . . . . .
flushefi'd' ‘ ‘ ‘ an - . ”.7- . . ,_ - - . .

 

Y
J

    

A.’

.';;VL1\ I

1.1:?!) A ”V

i

I n

-. 4 ‘ 1 5 1 #

U111 .‘L’

5‘5

ity

   

___‘

' '5

   

 

r—rr'we

 

1 n . FI1.-I4~..E 7

[
n .
.

ABSTRACT

GENETIC VARIATION IN EASTERN WHITE PINE
FROM THE SOUTHERN APPALACHIAN MOUNTAINS
By
Ray Jerome Amiel

Provenance test in eastern white pine (giggg strobus)
from the southern Appalachian Mountains representing 177
half-sib families from #9 stands. Four test plantations
were established in southern Michigan: W.K. Kellogg
Forest (161 seedlots), Fred Russ Forest (80 seedlots),
Hidden Lake Garden (85 seedlots) and Roscommon County (94
seedlots).

Mortality in all plantations was low to moderate,
ranging from 8-33%. Greatest mortality occurred in the
first year after planting, due to planting shock.

Growth rate differences were large between stand
progenies. Trees from the Tennessee-North Carolina border
southward to northern Georgiagrew the fastest in both
Theight and diameter. Trees from these stands grew 4~lU%
faster than the plantation average. The slowest growing
Stéind progenies were trees from Virginia and West Virginia.

Tk%2es from these stands grew 6«14% slower than the plantation

Ray Jerome Amiel
averages. A 30% growth rate difference was recorded be-
tween the fastest and slowest growing stand progenies when
planted in Michigan.

Diameter growth recorded similar results to that of
height. Trees from along the Tennessee-North Carolina
border grew 8-16% faster than the plantation average.
Absent from among the 20% largest in diameter were trees
from northern Georgia. These trees were among the tallest
20% in height, but were near or below the plantation
average in diameter. Trees from Virginia and West
Virginia recorded the smallest diameters.

Insects were a minor problem in all test plantations.
White pine weevil (Pissodes strobi) attacks ranged from
0.0 at Hidden Lake Garden and Fred Russ Forest to 14
trees at Kellogg Forest (0.5% of the live trees). White-
pine shoot borer (Eucosma gloriola) recorded 180 attacks
in the Kellogg Forest plantation. Most white-pine shoot
borer attacks occurred on the lateral branches. Stem
form is excellent in all plantations.

Needle growth was scored in the spring of 1977 at
the Kellogg Forest plantation. Trees from Virginia and
West Virginia began needle growth first. Trees from North

Carolina were the last to begin needle growth.

GENETIC VARIATION IN EASTERN WHITE PINE
FROM THE SOUTHERN APPALACHIAN MOUNTAINS
BY
Ray Jerome Amiel

A THESIS
Submitted to
Michigan State University

in partial fulfillment of the requirements
- for the degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE
Department of Forestry

1977

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I wish to extend my sincere gratitude to Dr. J.w.
Wright. His guidance and instruction have been invaluable
in this study. I am indebted to Don DeHayes for his
encouragement, discussion and data he helped collect in
1975. I wish to thank my wife. Rodonna, for the considerable
time she spent typing and helping me collect data. Finally,

my parents, J.B. and Sarah Amiel, for their support, advice

and friendship.

ii

LIST OF TABLES .

LIST OF FIGURES

INTRODUCTION .

TABLE OF CONTENTS

MATERIAL AND METHODS

RESULTS

Mortality .

Fruiting

Color”.

Number of Branches .

Needle Growth .

Winter Injury . .

Insect Damage .

Height . .

Diameter Growth .

Results of Plantations in Australia,
Indiana, West Virginia, Nebraska, and

Tennessee .

PRACTICAL APPLICATION .

SUWWMRI’.

ll
12
13
15
17
18
21
26

LIST OF REFERENCES .
APPENDIX . . . . . .

TABLE
1.

2.

Al.

A2.
A3.
A4.

1A5.

LIST OF TABLES

Page

Establishment details and mortality
in eastern white pine plantations
in southern MiChigan o o o c' o o o o o o o o o 10

Number of branches in the 1977 whorl.

the 10 stand progenies with the least and

the 10 stand progenies with the most

branChe S O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 14

Height of the 10 fastest and 10 slowest

growing stand progenies at age 10 when

measured at W. K. Kellogg Forest and

Hidden Lake Garden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

Correlation analysis between half-sib

family heights at age 10 and half-sib

family heights at ages 4, 7 and 9

when measured at W. K. Kellogg Forest . . . . .25

Ranking of the 10 lowest and 10
highest height/diameter ratios at W. K.
Kellogg Forest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

Analysis of Variance table of height,
diameter, phenology and number of
branCheS O O I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O .38

Height data on stand progenies at W. K.
Kellogg Forest and Hidden Lake Garden . . . . .31

Diameter data on stand progenies at
W. K. Kellogg Forest . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

Height/diameter ratio on stand progenies at
W. K. Kellogg Forest . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

Needle growth data on stand progenies at
W. K. Kellogg Forest scored on May 22, 1977
with a scale of 0 to 5 . . . . . . . . . .. . #5

TABLE Page
A6. Number of lateral branches in the

1977 whorl for stand progenies at W. K.
ForeSto O O O O O O O 0 O O Q Q 0 I O O 0 O O “7

vi

FIGURE
1.

LIST OF FIGURES

Location of eastern white pine
parental stands whose offspring were
tested in the present experiment

and previous experiments . .

vii

Page

INTRODUCTION

Eastern white pine (giggg strobus) is a favorite tree
in the eastern United States. In the latter half of the
19th and early part of the 20th century, eastern white pine
was the main staple of the lumber industry. The species
grew in pure or mixed stands, with red pine (Pings resinosa)
and eastern hemlock (ngga canadinsis) being its main
associates. Tall, straight, clear-bole trees were found in
many virgin stands, some trees towering over 200 ft tall and
4 to 5 ftoin diameter (maximum 220 ft by 6 ft). Unfortunate-
ly, most of these stands are gone.

Today, the species plays a minor role in the lumber and
pulp industries. Planting has been limited for several
reasons. White pine is not a good pulp species and early
thinnings are difficult to sell. Fear of damage from two
forest pests has been the main reason for the low volume
planted in the past. The pests are white pine weevil
(Pissodes strobi), a native forest insect and white pine
blister rust (Cronartium ribicola), an introduced fungus
from Asia. White pine weevil causes serious stem deforma-
tion in many areas, attacking and killing the leader.

Foresters were concerned that white pine blister rust would

2
cause serious mortality in young trees.

Eastern white pine is very intolerant to salt Spray.

In areas where road salting is common, trees near the road
have brown mottled foliage in the spring. This salt Spray
affects both young and old trees. Growth can be greatly
reduced.

However, eastern white pine has many valuable character-
istics. The Species is very adaptable. Although it prefers
a sandy loam, it will successfully grow on soils ranging
from sand to lowland swamps and bogs. 0n good sites,
eastern white pine will grow 3 ft per year in height and 1/2
in per year in diameter. In areas of low weevil population,
tree bole are tall and straight. The wood quality is
excellent. The species has soft, strong durable wood ideal
for windows and doors. White pine blister rust is common
in only a few areas of Michigan. The tree has found great
value as an ornamantal in our cities and parks. The blue-
green foliage and rapid growth gives the species anzadvantage
over many other conifers. Also, it is an impressive exotic

in many European and Asian countries.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Seed was collected from natural stands in the autumns
of 196“ to 1966 in the extreme southern part of the native
range of the species, Naryland to Georgia. The seeds were
sown at the Michigan State University Tree Research Center
nursery in the fall of 1966 and germinated in the Spring of
1967. Four test plantations were established in Michigan,
two in 1969 with 2-0 seedling stock and two in 1970 with
3-0 seedling stock. In all, there were a total of 1?? half-
sib families stands (Figure 1).

0f the four test plantations, three were established
in the southern third of the lower pennisula and the fourth,
Roscommon, is found in the northern half of the lower penni-
sula. All plantations, with the exception of that at Hidden
Lake Garden, are in the natural range of eastern white pine.
Site and soil_conditions vary greatly between plantations,
below is a brief description of each plantation:

l.) W.K. Kellogg Forest, Augusta, Kalamazoo County,
Michigan. Site rolling with a sandy loam soil,
grass 2-5 ft tall, gentle south aspect.

2.) Fred Russ Forest, Volinia, Cass County, Michigan.
Site rolling with steep north and south aspects,
Slopes up to 25%; sandy loam soil with sparse

3

Figure 1.

Location of eastern white pine parental
stands whose offSpring were tested in
the present experiment (numbered dots)
and previous experiments (triangles).
(from Wright, 1976).

6

grass ground cover and natural regeneration of
black walnut, yellow poplar, white ash and sugar
maple.

3.) Hidden Lake Garden, Tipton, Hillsdale County,
Michigan. Site nearly level with a dense cover of
grass 3-5 ft tall; soil a loam to clay loam.

4.) Roscommon, Crawford County, Michigan. Level
site, a sandy to loamy sand; sparse grass and
sweet-fern ground cover: eastern white pine was
originally supported on the site; site both the
coldest and driest. I

Each plantation was treated with amino-triazole
(2 gal/treated acre), sprayed in two-foot wide strips the
fall before planting and with simazine (4 lbs/treated acre)
immediately after planting. The Kellogg plantation was
re-sprayed with simazine 3 years after planting.

Plantations were established in the springs of 1969
(Kellogg and Roscommon) and 1970 (Hidden Lake and Russ).
Three plantations were established with an 8 x 8 ft spacing,
randomized complete block design, with A tree line plots, and
surrounded by a single border row. The other plantation at
Hidden Lake Garden has no border row and was planted with
15 X 15 ft spacing. Not all seedlots were planted in all
plantations, due to the unavailability of planting stock.

The Kellogg Forest plantation is the largest having 161 half-
sib families from UN stands. That at Russ Forest is the

smallest, having 80 half-sib families from 26 stands.

7

Measurements were made periodically, with each planta-
tion having been measured 3-4 times since planting and once
in the nursery. Height measurements were recorded as the
average of the tallest 50% of the trees in the plot,
measured to the nearest quarter of a foot.

In the winter and spring of 1977, Zimeasured the height
and weevil damage at Kellogg Forest and Hidden Lake Garden.
Diameter, phenology, and number of branches were measured
at Kellogg Forest. In previous years, white-pine Shoot borer
attacks were measured at Kellogg Forest. At Russ Forest,
height and weevil attacks were measured by J.W. Wright and
Don DeHayes in the summer of 1975.

The Kellogg plantation has been measured for diameter at
heights of 1 ft and A 1/2 ft. Diameters were recorded as the
average of the tallest 50% trees in the plot to the nearest
tenth inch. Needle growth was Scored in the spring of 1977
on a scale of 0 (no needle growth) to 5 (needles B/U in long
or greater).

Most plantations have been Scored for the amount of
infestation of the two major pests of eastern white pine,
white-pine shoot borer (Eucosma gloriola) and white pine
weevil (Pissodes strobi). In each case the data was recorded
as the number of trees attacked. There was no damage or
mortality recorded due to white pine blister rust.

An analysis of variance was performed on each of the
8 sets of data using the plot means as items for height,

diameters, number of branches and phenology and plot totals

8
for insect attacks. For missing plots, I substituted the

seedlot means, and subtracted the appropriate number of
degrees of freedom from the error term.

The total variation was separated into variances due
to blocks, error and half-sib families. The half-sib
family variances were separated into between stand
variance and within stand variance. To determine the levels
of Significance, the between stand and within stand variance

terms were tested against error of variance.

RESULTS
MORTALITY

Mortality in the four plantations is summarized in
Table 1. Survival was moderate to high in all plantations.
The greater mortality recorded in Roscommon County was
due to the heavy cover of sweet fern (Comptonia peregrina)
which resisted the weed control chemicals. In the other
plantations, most mortality was in the first year after
planting and was probably due to transplanting shock.

The greatest field mortality recorded was in the
West Virginia seedlots that arrived to late to be sown in
the nursery in the fall of 1966 . These seedlots accounted
for 48% of all West Virginia seedlots. At the time of
field planting, these seedlots were smaller than the
other planting stock. Plantation mortality would likely
have been much smaller if these West Virginia seedlots

would have been larger at the time of planting.

10

Table l.--Establishment details and morality in eastern
white pine plantations in Southern Michigan.

 

 

 

Plantation Number
Number Last of trees
and Location Planting Measurement Planted Mortality
no.‘ %
W.K. Kellogg
Forest 1969 197? 3312 14
(8-69)
Fred Russ
Forest 1970 1975 1416 20
(1-7o>
Hidden Lake
Garden 1970 1977 1874 8
(10-70)
Roscommon
County 1969 1975 1816 33
(5-69

 

ll

FRUITING

Cone production has begun on a limited number of trees.
In 1977, Kellogg Forest has 39 trees bearing cones. No
Single seed source is producing a large number of cones, but
the greatest concentration of fruiting is in the West Virginia
and Virginia provenances. Unfortunately, these provenances
are among the slowest growing in all plantations. At
Kellogg Forest, the Virginia and West Virginia trees contain
73% of the total trees producing cones.

Only the Kellogg Forest plantation has many trees
bearing cones. It will be a number of years before this
or the other plantation may be used as an improved seed

orchard.

12

COLOR

Foliage color was scored at Kellogg Forest by J.W.
Wright and Donald DeHayes in the summer of 1975. Color
ranged from green to blue-green. The differences among

seedlots were not significant.

13

NUMBER OF BRANCHES

I counted the number of lateral branches formed in 1977
at Kellogg Forest. The average of the two tallest trees was
recorded for each plot. Trees from Amherst County, Virginia
had the least number of branches, averaging 7 branches per
whorl. Trees from Garrett County, maryland had the most
branches, averaging 11 branches per whorl. I found no
evidence of a north-south cline. Differences between stand
progeny from the same state were as large as those recorded
between states. Table 2 ranks the results of the 10 stands
with the least branches and 10 stands with the most branches.

Funk (1970) found that northern stand progenies tend
to produce more branches that stand progenies further south.
Garrett (1973), working with many plantations throughout the
northeast, found similar results, the northern provenances
having more branches. In this study, no relationship was
found between number of branches and region of origin.

No relationship was found between number of branches
and height. Correlation analysis between height and number
of branches Showed no significance at the 5% level, with

160 degrees of freedom.

14

Table 2.--Number of branches in the 1977 whorl, the
10 stand progenies with the least and the
10 stand progenies with the most branches.

 

 

 

Map Number 7

Rank Number State County of Branches
1 24 VA Amherst 7.2
2 26 VA Craig 7.2
3 33 WV Greenbrier 7.3
4 21 TN Anderson 7.4
5 45 WV Braxton 7.6
6 30 TN Monroe 7.7
7 43 WV Pocahontas 7.8
8 1 GA Fannin 7.8
9 18 NC Burke 7.8
10 3? WV Greenbrier 7.8
40 30 VA Rockingham 8.5
41 27 VA Botetourt 8.6
42 46 WV Pleasants 8.7
43 12 NC Buncombe 8.7
44 25 VA Montgomery 8.8
45 6 GA Rabun 9.0
46 10 NC Graham 9.3
47 32 WV Greenbrier 9.3
48 29 VA Augusta 10.7
49 48 MD Garrett 11.0

 

Plantation Mean

m
o
N

15

NEEDLE GROWTH

On May 22, 1977, the amount of new growth was scored
at the Kellogg Forest plantation. In most plots, the
candles were fully extended. A scale of 0-5 was used.

The grades are defined below:

0--fasicle sheath not expanded,

l--fasicle sheath slightly expanded, needles not yet

visible,

2--needles less than 1/4 in long,

3--needles 1/4 to 1/2 in long,

4--needles 1/2 to 3/4 in long and

5--need1es greater than 3/4 in long.

The Virginia and West Virginia trees began growth
earlier than trees from farther south. Trees from Virginia
had needles 3/4 in long, whereas trees in North Carolina had
needles less than 1/4 in long.

Steiner (1975), working with the rangewide provenance
trial at Kellogg Forest, recorded a trend similar to that
found in the southern Appalachian study. On June 6, 1973,
he scored the trees on a scale of 0 (fasicle sheath not
expanded) to 10 (needle greater than 1 in long). He
reported that the Minnesota progeny began needle growth
first and the Virginia progeny started needle growth last.
Differences recorded between first and last trees to begin
needle growth were as large as those recorded in the

southern Appalachian study. However, there was a difference

16
between the two studies. The Virginia trees which began
needle growth among the earliest in the southern Appalachian

study, were the last to begin growth in the earlier range-

wide study. Also, needle growth began two weeks earlier
in 1977 than in 1973.

1?
WINTER INJURY

Branch breakage due to snow caused some damage in the
Kellogg Forest plantation. Deep snow drifts covered the
lower 2-3 whorls of branches on trees along the western
edge of the plantation. In the spring, the heavy compacted
snow caused some branch breakage. In the more protected
areas of the plantation, snow drifts were smaller and less
limb breakage was recorded.

Salt spray injury is apparent in the Hidden Lake
Garden plantation. Trees planted along state highway-50
have brown mottled foliage. The first 2-3 rows have heavy
damage. Trees away from the highway had little foliage

discoloration. .

18

INSECT DAMAGE

Eastern white pine has three major pests. Two insects,
white pine weevil (Pissodes strobi) and white-pine Shoot
borer (Eucosma gloriola) caused the greatest damage. The
third pest, white pine blister rust (Cronartium ribicola),
is a fungus causing problems only in the northwestern portion
of the natural range. The four test plantations have record-
ed no tree losses due to the fungus.

At Kellogg Forest, white pine weevil attacks were
spread randomly throughout the plantation, attacking 0.5%
of the live trees in 1976. Stem form in all plantations
remains excellent. The range of weevil attacks in the
plantations is 0.0 at Hidden Lake Garden and Fred Russ
Forest to 14 trees at W.K. Kellogg Forest.

White-pine shoot borer had the greatest frequency
of attack of the insects studied at Kellogg Forest.

A total of 180 attacks were recorded. The insect attacks
the lateral branches or the leader, feeding on the cambium
in the new growth. Branch dieback is unsightly and causes
stem deformation when the leader is attacked. Fortunately,
most of the attacks were on lateral branches.

Analyses of the attacks were done two ways. First
analysis of variance was done, calculating variances due to
block, seedlot within stand, and seedlot between stands.
There were significant differences at the 1% level among

stand progenies and blocks. There were also significant

l9

differences recorded within stands.

Also, Chi-square analysis was used to test significance
of differences among stand progenies and blocks. In both
cases, significant differences were recorded between stand
progenies and between blocks at the 1% level.

The block differneces are due to the large number of
insect attacks in the southern half of the plantations.
Blocks 2, 4, and 5 are adjacent to each other in the southern
portion of the plantation. These blocks contain 78% of white-
pine shoot borer attacks in the plantation. The insect, .
commonly attacks in a pocket pattern (Baker, 1972., Drooz,
1960). In all liklihood, this accounts for the high block
effect found in the plantation.

Stand progenies from the Tennessee-North Carolina
border, south to northern Georgia, had the greatest frequency
of attacks. When considering the 3 blocks with the highest
number of attacks, 66% (93 attacks) of all white-pine shoot
borer attacks were in the tallest 20% (10 stands) stand-
progenies.

Correlation analysis was done on the height and number
of attacks in blocks 2, 4, and 5 were compared with the
sum of the plot mean heights for the same blocks. The
results showed a relationship between the two character-
istics, significant at the 1% level (r:.66), with 160
degrees of freedom. Height accounted for 44% of the vari-
ation of the frequency of attacks in those blocks.

Analysis was done on the relationship between the

number of branches and frequency of attacks. The results

20
were significant at the 1% level (r=.22), with 160 degrees
of freedom. The number of branches may account for only
5% of the variation in the frequency of attack.

The greatest frequency of white-pine shoot borer
attacks were in the stand progenies from Tennessee-North
Carolina border south to north Georgia. These trees are
among the tallest, are in the process of crown closure
with their neighbors and are the dominate trees in the
plantation. These factors may influence the adult female

in her selection of the trees for depositing her eggs.

21

HEIGHT

Plantations have been measured periodically since
planting in the Springs of 1969 and 1970. After 1973, the
plantations began maximum height production. Many trees
have an annual increase in height of 3 ft or more. In
1977, some individual trees were taller than 20 ft. The
southern Appalachian eastern white pine plantations at
Kellogg and Russ Forests are among the fastest growing
pine plantations relative to age.

Growth rate differences between stands were large in
all plantations. Trees from along the Tennessee-North
Carolina border southward into northern Georgia had relative
height 4-l4% above the plantation means. Trees from Virginia
West Virginia and Maryland grew 6-16% slower than the
plantation means (Table 3). The growth differences were
84% to 114% of the mean of the mean.

Plantation averages varied greatly. The Kellogg Forest
plantation was the tallest, 12.2 ft after 10 seasons growth.
The Shortest plantation was that at Roscommon, 2.6 ft tall
after 8 seasons growth. The Roscommon plantation, in
earlier studies by Fowler (1969) and King (1969), is
considered to far north for vigorous growth of the southern
Appalachian eastern white pine. The three most southern
plantations are growing well. In the past 3 years, heights
of some trees in these plantations have more than doubled.

Analysis of variance of the Kellogg Forest and Hidden

23

Table 3.--Height of the 10 fastest and 10 Slowest growing
stand progenies at age 10 when measured at
W. K. Kellogg Forest and Hidden Lake Garden.

 

 

 

Map _ Kellogg Hidden Lake Combined
Rank Number State County Forest Garden Average
1 19 TN Polk 117 110 114
2 21 TN Anderson 112 113 112
3 3 GA Union 112 - 112
4 10 NC Graham 110 - 110
5 20 TN Monroe 106 114 110
6 22 TN Carter 110 110 110
7 11 NC Buncombe 108 - 108
8 2 GA Fannin 112 93 107
9 13 NC Yancey 108 93 104
10 4 GA Rabun 104 104 104
40 28 VA Augusta 94 - 94
41 46 WV Pleasants 92 102 94
42 42 WV Podahontas92 96 93
43 16 NC Burke 90 ' 99 93
44 36 WV Greenbrier92 - 92
45 28 VA Alleghany - 9o 90
46 4? WV Wetzel 84 98 90
47 45 WV Braxton 78 100 88
48 37 WV Greenbrier80 98 88
H9 26 VA -Craig 84 - 84

 

Actual mean, cm. 373 269 337

23

Table 3.--Height of the 10 fastest and 10 Slowest growing
stand progenies at age 10 when measured at
W. K. Kellogg Forest and Hidden Lake Garden.

 

 

 

Map , Kellogg Hidden Lake Combined
Rank Number State County Forest Garden Average
1 19 TN Polk 117 110 114
2 21 TN Anderson 112 113 112
3 3 GA Union 112 - 112
4 10 NC Graham 110 - 110
5 20 TN Monroe 106 114 110
6 22 TN Carter 110 110 110
7 11 NC Buncombe 108 - 108
8 2 GA Fannin 112 93 107
9 13 NC Yancey 108 93 104
10 4 GA Rabun 104 104 104
40 28 VA Augusta 94 - 94
41 46 WV Pleasants 92 102 94
42 42 WV Podahontas92 96 93
43 16 NC Burke 90 ' 99 93
44 36 WV Greenbrier92 - 92
45 28 VA Alleghany - 90 90
46 47 WV Wetzel 84 98 90
47 45 WV Braxton 78 100 88
48 37 WV Greenbrier80 98 88
49 26 VA -Craig 84 - 84

 

Actual mean, cm. 373 269 337

24

Lake Garden plantations resulted in significant differences
among stands of origin at the 1% level. No differences
were recorded among parents within stands. The best
stand progenies in one plantation were likely to be among
the best in the other plantations in southern Michigan.

Correlation analysis on the mean seedlot height at
Kellogg Forest were calculated, comparing the first three
plantation measurements to the results recorded in 1977
(Table 4). The results indicate that the seedlots and
stands that were the fastest growing at age 4 are likely
to be the fastest growing at age 10, statistically Signifi-
cant at the 1% level with 160 degrees of freedom. The
results closely resemble the age X age correlations reported
by Genys (1967, 1977) and Sluder (1971)_for the rangewide
.eastern white pine studies. In this study and others, the
provenances from Tennessee, North Carolina and Georgia

remain the tallest after 10 seasons of growth.

25

Table 4.--Correlation analysis between half-sib family
heights at age 10 and half-sib family heights
at ages 4, 7 and 9 when measured at W.K.

Kellogg Forest.

 

 

 

Number Degrees Plantation
Year of Seasons of Means
Measured Growth r Freedom (in feet)
1970 4 .82** 160 1.83
1974 7 .97** 160 4.87
1975 9 .98** 160 10.20
1977 10 -- 160 12.24

 

**--significant at 1% level

26
DIAMETER GROWTH

Differences in diameter growth, both at 1 foot and
4 1/2 feet, were as large as those recorded in height.
Significant differences were recorded at the 1% level be-
tween stands, at both diameter locations and difference with-
in stands (5% level) in diameter at breast height.

At Kellogg Forest, the plantation average at d.b.h.
was 2.2 in (5.6 cm). Average diameter at 1 foot was 3.1 in
(7.9 cm). The range of stand means were 1.5 in (3.8 cm) to
2.9 in (7.4 cm) at d.b.h. and 2.1 in (5.3 cm) to 4.0 in
(10.2 cm) for diameter at 1 foot. Stands with the largest.
diameter were from Burke County, North Carolina. Trees with
the smallest diameters were from Braxton County, West
Virginia. Correlation analysis on seedlot means recorded
an r:.86, Significant at the 1% level. The best stands at
one diameter would likely be the best at the other diameter.

The correlation between height and diameter was
calculated. Correlation was Significant (r-.72) at the 1%
level, with 160 degrees of freedom. Even though the coeffi-
cient of correlation was significant, the height X diameter
relationship can only account for 52% (r=.52) of the varia-
tion between these two characteristics. .

Due to the low coefficient of determination (r2),
analysis of variance was performed on the height/diameter
(diameter at 1 ft) ratio. The results show significant

differences between stands and replications. Stand progeny

27
with the lowest height/diameter ratio were trees from North
Carolina. Generally, these trees were in the top 20% in
both height and diameter growth. Trees with the highest/
diameter ratio were from Virginia, West Virginia and central
North Carolina (Table 5). Trees from Georgia were among the
top 20% in height, but in diameter these same stand progenies
were near or below the plantation mean.

When selecting southern Appalachian eastern white pine
for planting, trees from along the Tennessee-North Carolina
border would likely have maximum height and diameter growth.
These stand progenies were in the top 20% in height and were
above the plantation average in diameter when measured at

Kellogg Forest.

28

Table 5.--Ranking of the 10 lowest and 10 highest height/
diameter ratios at W.K. Kellogg Forest.

 

 

 

 

Relative
Height-Diameter
Rank Map No. State County Ratio
1 10 NC Graham 85
2 7 NC macon 85
3 33 WV Greenbrier 85
4 23 VA Carroll 85
5 18 NC Burke 89
6 17 NC Caldwell 91
7 11 NC Buncombe 91
8 9 NC Henderson 92
9 39 WV Pocahontas 93
10 48 MD Garrett 93
40 35 WV Greenbrier 103
41 25 VA Montgomery 104
42 16 NC Burke 108
43 11 NC Buncombe 108
44 34 WV Greenbrier 110
45 43 WV Pocahontas 110
46 3 GA Union 112
47 6 GA Rabun 116
48 47 WV Wetzel 116
49 29 VA Augusta 122
Mean 16.4

29
RESULTS OF PLANTATIONS IN AUSTRALIA,
INDIANA, WEST VIRGINIA, NEBRASKA AND
TENNESSEE

Seeds or planting stock was distributed to Australia,
Indiana, West Virginia, Nebraska and Tennessee. These
plantations were established in a method similar to those
in Michigan. The Australian plantation was planted inter-
mixed with Seed from the rangewide provenance trial of the
University of Maryland (Genys, 1967). The other plantations
were the same stand progenies as those found in Michigan.

Survival at all plantations was high. The Indiana
plantation had the highest survival, with 89%. The Victoria,
Australian plantation recorded the lowest survival, 73%.

Similar to the results recorded in Michigan test
plantations, the stand progenies from Tennessee and North
Carolina were the tallest. Trees from Virginia and West
Virginia were the shortest. Sprackling and Read (1976) in
Nebraska found that the Tennessee trees from Polk County
were the tallest and trees from Cherokee County, North
Carolina were the shortest. Both counties' trees were in
the top 20% in height when planted in Michigan. In the
other plantations, it was the more northern trees that had
the Slowest height growth (Thor, 1975).

In Nebraska, 20 trees were producing cones in 1974.
Fifteen of these trees (75%) were from West Virgina (Sprack-

ling, et a1. 1976). Similar results were recorded in this

30

study, where 39 trees were bearing cones and 73% of these
trees were from Virginia and West Virginia.

Limitations to the planting of southern Appalachian
eastern white pine have been discussed by Garrett (1977)
and King (1969). In many plantations throughout the north-
east, the southern Appalachian trees from Tennessee, North
Carolina and Georgia grew the fastest when planted south of
southern New York. In areas north of southern New York,
north central Michigan and central Wisconsin, trees from
central and lower midwestern trees grew the fastest when
planted in this area. Fowler (1969) found in southern
Ontario that trees from Pennsylvania and southern Michigan
and Ontario had the best results north of a line from New
York to central WiSconsin.

Results from plantations throughout the United States
and Australia were similar to those in southern Michigan.
Trees from Tennessee and North Carolina had the best overall
height. These plantations were where southern Appalachian
eastern white pine has recorded excellent height growth.
Planting of the southern Appalachian trees is undesirable
north of central Michigan and central Wisconsin. Cone
production had similar results as those recorded in Michigan.
Virginia and West Virginia trees are producing the most

001188.

PRACTICAL APPLICATION

Eastern white pine from the southern Appalachian
Mountains has the potential for excellent growth when
planted in southern Michigan. In this area of extensive
farming and numerous small woodlots, eastern white pine is
an impressive timber species, capable of short rotations of
40 years, producing excellent, knot-free, high value logs
with careful thinning and pruning. Annual growth of 3 ft
or more in height and 1/2 - 3/4 in in diameter can be
achieved.

When planting the southern Appalachian sources, careful
consideration should be taken in the selection of planting
Site. Planting in the northern half of Michigan may be
undesirable. As discussed earlier in the paper, the Ros-
common plantation has had very poor height development.
Early studies by Wright (1970, 1976) and King et al. (1969)
found the southern Appalachian sources did poorly when
planted north of a line from Muskegon to Bay City, Michigan.
North of this region, the plantations have shown slow growth,
some needle damage, loss of vigor and some additional
mortality.

Stem deformation due to white pine weevil or white-pine

Shoot borer has been a minor problem in the Michigan test

31

32
plantations. In some areas of the United States, white
pine weevil has caused serious stem deformation. In these
areas, serious consideration Should be taken before planting
eastern white pine. Other pine Species may be more desirable
than eastern white pine in the areas with large weevil
populations.

The procurement of southern Appalachian planting stock
and seed is the largest problem facing foresters in the near
future. Forest nurseries in Tennessee and North Carolina
use seed collected from native white pine stands and for
the next few years this will be the only reliable source
of planting stock available. Collection of seed from
dominate trees in natural stands on the Tennessee-North
Carolina border is likely to be of the same genetic quality
as trees planted in the test plantations throughout Michigan.
A seed dealer in Oklahoma has shown interest in the pro-
curement of eastern white pine seed from Tennessee. This
dealer and others in Tennessee and North Carolina are likely
to be the only reliable source of southern Appalachian
eastern white pine seed at the present time. Seed orders
through these dealers are likely to have a 1-2 yr delay
before fulfillment. This is due to the low stock pile of
suitable seed.

In the future, test plantations will be thinned in
order to make seed orchards. Seedlots from the best
stands are well represented in the test plantations and

seed collected for these plantations in the future should

33

be of the same genetic quality as seed collected from
natural stands. Within the next two years, crown closure
will be complete and the thinning process will begin for
rapid change of the plantations into seed orchards.

The NC-99 rangewide provenance trials for eastern
white pine has begun producing a large number of cones
18 yrs after planting. Unfortunately, the Slower growing
Minnesota trees are producing the greatest number of cones.
Trees from Tennessee and North Carolina are producing few
cones. Moderate quantities of southern Appalachian seed
should become available in the next 10 years from these
two studies. Trees will have obtained the height of 40-50
ft.

SUMMARY

Seed of eastern white pine was collected in the autumn
from 177 natural trees located in 49 stands scattered from
Maryland to northern Georgia. The resulting seedlings were
replicated in four plantations in southern Michigan.
Plantations were last measured at age 10 from seed.

Growth and survival were high in the three southern
Michigan plantations. Trees grown from seed collected
along the Tennessee-North Carolina border grew the fastest
in height and diameter, averaging 3 ft or more per year in
height and 1/2 - 3/4 in per year in diameter growth. Trees
from these stands grew 15-25% faster than most trees from
Maryland, West Virginia and Virginia.

White pine weevil (Pissodes strobi) and white-pine
shoot borer (Eucosma gloriola) has caused minor stem
deformation in the test plantations. Weevil damage ranged
from 0 trees attacked at Hidden Lake Garden to 14 trees
attacked at Kellogg Forest. White-pine Shoot borer
averaged .06 attacks per tree at Kellogg Forest.

Start of needle growth showed a cline from north to
south, with Virginia and West Virginia trees starting
growth earliest. North Carolina trees were the last to

begin needle growth. Trees from Virginia produced the
34

35

least number of branches and trees from Maryland had the
most branches. No"evidence of a north-south cline was
evident.

Cone production has been light in all plantations.
Thirty-nine trees are presently producing cones. Trees
from Virginia and West Virginia are producing 73% of the
cones at Kellogg Forest. Trees will likely be 20 yr old
and 40-50 ft tall before large quantities of seed are

produced.

LIST OF REFERENCES

LIST OF REFERENCES

Baker, W. L. 1972. Eastern forest insects. U.S.D.A.
Forest Serv. Mis. Pub. No. 1175.

Drooz, A. T. 1960. White-pine shoot borer (Eucosma
gloriola Heinrick). Econ. Entomol. 53:248-251.

Garrett, P. W., E. J. Schreiner and J. Kettlewood. 1973.
Geographic variation of eastern white pine in the
Northeast. U.S.D.A., Forest Serv. Res. Pap.
NE-274. l4pp.

Genys, J. B. 1968. Geographic variation in eastern white
pine. Two-year results of testing rangewide
collections in Maryland. Silvae Genet. 18:83-86.

Genys, J. B., D. Canavera, J. D. Gerhold, J. J. Jokela,
B. R. Stephan, I. J. Thalin, R. Westfall and
J. W. Wright. 1977. Intraspecific variation
of eastern white in seven states of the J.S.A.
and in Germany, Australia and New Zealand.
(in press). E

Fowler, D. P. and C. Heimburger. 1969. Geographic
variation in eastern white pine, 7year results
in Ontario. Silva Genet. 18:123-129.

Funk, D. T. 1971. Eastern white pine Seed sources
trials: ten-year results from three midwestern
plantations. U.S.D.A. For. Serv. Res. Note
NC-ll3. 4pp.

36

37

King, J. P. and H. Neinstaedt. 1969. Variation in
eastern sources planted in the Lake States.
Silva Genet. 18:83-86.

Sluder, E. R., K. W. Dorman. 1971. Performances
in the southern Appalachians of eastern white
pine seedlings from different-provenances.
U.S.D.A. For. Ser. Res. Pap.- SE-90, llpp.

Sprackling, J.\A. and R. A. Read. 1976. Eastern
white pine in eastern Nebraska: a provenance
study of southern Appalachian origins.
U.S.D.A. For. Ser. Res. Pap. RM-l79.

Steiner, K. C. 1975. Patterns of genetic variation
within fifteen tree species in time of bud
burst and flowering. Michigan State University,
Ph. D. thesis. '

Thor, E. 1975. White pines from the southern
Appalachians. Central States For. Tree
ImprOV. Conf o PI'OV. 931145-152 0

Wright, J. W. 1970. Genetics of eastern white pine.
U.S.D.A. For. Serv. Res. Pap. WG-9, l6pp.

Wright, J. W., W. A. Lemmien, J. N. Bright and G.
Kowalewski. 1976. Rapid growth of southern
Appalachian white pine in southern Michigan
Mich. Ag. Expt. Sta. Res. Pap. 307.

APPENDIX

38

Table Al.--Analysis of variance table of height, diameter,
needle growth, number of branches, height/
diameter ratio and Eucosma.

 

 

Characteristic
and Plantation

Degrees of
Freedom

BS WS R ER

Sum of
Sguares F-Value
BS WS R ER BS WS R

 

Height
(Kellogg Forest)

Height
(Hidden Lake)

Diameter at
4 1/2 feet
(Kellogg Forest)

Diameter at
1.0 feet
(Kellogg Forest)

Phonology
(Kellogg Forest)

Number of
Branches
(Kellogg Forest)

Height-Diameter
Ratio
(Kellogg Forest)

Eucosma
(Kellogg Forest) 28

32
12

32

32

32
32

32

128

73

128

128

128

128

128

132

4 619
4 301

4 619

4 619

2 320

2 320

4 619

4 619

11.37’ 17.13*
8066 35362 1.10

2214 741 5.03’ 5.07*
2643 10995 $99 *

7162 1740 7.03 13.67
6378 19705 1-57

20788 3913

12556 1920 9.77T 11.93’
4178 24852 .81

it!

87.98 13.20 1.53 3.67

269.63 575.00 1.17

18 523 1.32 .-59'
1431--2.78

1.94* 2.83*
1.13

9
1595

726
1681

132
7228

27.32 8.21 2.93’ 7.09*
59.28 184.36 1.58

 

BS--Between stands
WS--Within stands
R--Replication

*--Significant 5% level

**--significant at 1% level
ER--Error

39

Table A2.--Height data on stand progenies at W.K. Kellogg
Forest and Hidden Lake Garden.

 

 

Relative Hei ht
Hidaen

 

Stand State
Map and Kellogg Lake Weighted
Number County Forest Garden Total
(% of mean)
1 GA Fannin 106 94 102
2 GA Fannin 112 93 107
3 GA Union 112 -- 112
4 GA Rabun 104 104 104
5 GA Rabun -- -- ~-
6 GA Rabun 95 -- 95
7 NC Macon 117 90 103
8 NC Cherokee 100 102 101
9 NC Henderson 106 -- 106
10 NC Graham 110 -- 110
11 NC Buncombe 108 -- 108
12 NC Buncombe 106 98 103
13 NC Yancey 108 93 103
14 NC Madison 102 96 99
15 NC Burke -- -- --
16 NC Burke 90 99 95
17 NC Caldwell 102 -- 102
18 NC Burke 98 103 100
19 TN Polk 119 110 114
20 TN Monroe 106 114 110
21 TN Anderson 112 113 112
22 TN Carter 110 110 110
23 VA Carroll 104 -- 104
24 VA Amherst 104 -- 104
25 VA Montgomery 104 96 100
26 VA Craig . 84 -- 84
27 VA Botetourt 94 -- 94
28 VA Alleghany -- 90 90
29 VA Augusta 94 -- 94
30 VA Rockingham 94 101 96
31 KY Whitley 104 -- 104
32 WV Greenbrier 104 96 100
33 WV Greenbrier 96 -- 96
34 WV Greenbrier 90 93 92
35 WV Greenbrier 92 97 95
36 WV Greenbrier 92 -- 92
37 WV Greenbrier 80 98 88
38 WV Mercer 100 -- 100
39 WV Pocahontas 98 -- 98
40 WV Pocahontas 104 -- 104

Table A2 (cont'd.)

40

 

41 WV Pocahontas 100 85 93
42 WV Pocahontas 92 96 93
43 WV Pocahontas 90 -- 90
44 WV Tucker -- -- --
45 WV Braxton 78 100 88
46 WV Pleasants 92 102 94
47 WV Wetzel 84 98 9O
48 MD Garrett 104 -- 104
49 OH Monroe -- 82 82
Actual mean, cm. 373 269 337

41

Table A3.--Diameter data on stand proginies at W.K.
Kellogg Forest.

 

 

 

 

Stand
Map Diameter Diameter
Number State County at D.B.H. at Base
(% 0? mean)
1 GA Fannin 101 100
2 GA Fannin 113 113
3 GA Union 91 93
4 GA Rabun -- --
5 GA Rabun -- --
6 GA Rabun 114 106
7 NC Macon 110 116
8 NC Cherokee 101 100
9 NC Henderson 114 109
10 NC Graham 132 129
11 NC Buncombe 105 103
12 NC Buncombe 110 109
13 NC Yancey 114 113
14 NC Madison 105 103
15 NC Burke -- --
16 NC Burke 78 80
17 NC Caldwell 114 106
18 NC Burke 105 106
19 TN Polk 119 116
20 TN Monroe 110 106
21 TN Anderson 114 109
22 TN Carter 114 106
23 VA Carroll 119 113
24 VA Amherst 110 103
25 VA Montgomery 96 100
26 VA Craig 82 87
27 VA Botetourt 96 93
28 VA Alleghany -- ~-
29 VA Augusta 96 96
30 VA Rockingham 84 88
31 KY Whitley 105 103
32 WV Greenbrier 105 103
33 WV Greenbrier 101 109
34 WV Greenbrier 82 87
35 WV Greenbrier 87 90
36 WV Greenbrier 110 103
37 WV Greenbrier 68 80
38 WV Mercer 105 100
39 WV Pocahontas 110 103

40 WV Pocahontas 110 109

Ta 18 A3 (cont'd),
1 W

42
43
44
45

WV
WV
WV
WV
WV
WV
MD
OH

42

Pocahontas
Pocahontas
Pocahontas
Tucker
Braxton
Pleasants
Wetzel
Garrett
Monroe

110 100
87 93
82 84
68 77
87 87
78 80

109 106

 

Actual plantation Mean (1/10 inches)

Table A5 (cont'd)

41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49

WV
WV
WV
WV
WV
WV
WV

MD

OH

46

Pocahontas
Pocahontas
Pocahontas
Tucker
Braxton
Pleasants
Wetzel
Garrett
Monroe

HHHN'NHH
I O O
ummnunmro

 

Plantation Mean

1.0

 

47

Table A6.--Number of lateral branches in the 1977
whorl for stand progenies at W.K. Kellogg Forest.

 

 

 

Stand
MBP
Number State County Number of Branches
1 GA Fannin 7.8
2 GA‘ Fannin 9.0
3 GA. Union 7.3
4 GA Rabun ---
5 GA Rabun ---
6 GA Rabun 9.0
7 NC Macon 8.0
8 NC Cherokee 8.3
9 NC‘ Henderson 8.3
10 NC Graham 9.3
11 NC Buncombe 8.0
12 NC Buncombe 8.7
13 NC Yancey 8.3
14 NC madison 8.0
15 NC Burke ---
16 NC Burke 8.3
17 NC Caldwell 9.3
18 NC Burke 7.?
19 TN Polk 8.0
20 TN Monroe 7.7
21 TN Anderson 7.3
22 TN Carter 8.0
23 VA Carroll 8.7
24 VA Amherst 7.3
25 VA Montgomery 8.7
26 VA Craig 7.0
27 VA Botetourt 8.7
28 VA Alleghany ---
29 VA Augusta 10.7
30 VA Rockingham 8.5
31 KY Whitley 8.3
32 WV Greenbrier 9.3
3 WV Greenbrier 7.3
3 WV Greenbrier 7.0
35 WV Greenbrier 8.0
36 WV Greenbrier 8.0
3? WV Greenbrier 7.7
38 WV -Mercer 8.3
39 WV .Pocahontas 7.7
40 WV Pocahontas 8.3

 

Table A6 (cont'd)

41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49

WV
WV
WV
WV
WV
WV
WV
MD
OH

48

Pocahontas
Pocahontas
Pocahontas
Tucker
Braxton
Pleasants
Wetzel
Garrett
Monroe

l-‘CDmV I me
O
OUVV I \IUU

H
O O O

 

Plantation Mean

8.2

Jr LI- i‘ I-il‘.