INFORMATION TO USERS This reproduction was made from a copy o f a docum ent sent to us for microfilming. While the m ost advanced technology has been used to photograph and reproduce this docum ent, the quality o f the reproduction is heavily dependent upon the quality o f the m aterial subm itted. The following explanation o f techniques is provided to help clarify markings or notations which may appear on this reproduction. 1. The sign or “ targ et” for pages apparently lacking from the docum ent photographed is “Missing Page(s)” . If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along w ith adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cu tting through an image and duplicating adjacent pages to assure com plete co n tinuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a round black m ark, it is an indication o f either blurred copy because o f m ovem ent during exposure, duplicate copy, o r copyrighted materials th a t should n o t have been filmed. F or blurred pages, a good image o f the page can be found in the adjacent frame. If copyrighted materials were deleted, a target note will appear listing th e pages in the adjacent frame. 3. When a map, drawing o r chart, etc., is part o f the m aterial being photographed, a definite m ethod o f “sectioning” the m aterial has been followed. It is custom ary to begin filming at the upper left hand co m er o f a large sheet and to continue from left to right in equal sections w ith small overlaps. I f necessary, sectioning is continued again—beginning below the first row and continuing on until com plete. 4. F or illustrations th at cannot be satisfactorily reproduced by xerographic means, photographic prints can be purchased at additional cost and inserted into y o u r xerographic copy. These prints are available upon request from the D issertations C ustom er Services D epartm ent. 5. Some pages in any docum ent may have indistinct print. In all cases the best available copy has been filmed. University Microfilms International 300 N. Zeeb Road Ann Arbor, Ml 48106 8400580 K im , J i Hong DEVELOPMENT AND GROWTH OF SIX CONIFEROUS TREE SPECIES ON ABANDONED AGRICULTURAL SOILS IN SOUTHERN MICHIGAN M ich ig a n State University University Microfilms International 300 N. Zeeb R oad, Ann Arbor, Ml 48106 Ph.D. 1983 PLEASE NOTE: In all c a s e s this material h a s been filmed in the best possible way from th e available copy. Problem s e n co u n tered with this d o cu m en t have b een identified h ere with a ch eck m ark V 1. 2. . G lossy p h o to g rap h s or p a g e s _______ C olored illustrations, p ap er o r p rin t_____ 3. P h o to g rap h s with dark b a c k g ro u n d . 4. Illustrations a re po o r c o p y _______ 5. P a g e s with black marks, n o t original copy_______ 6. Print show s th ro u g h a s th e re is tex t on both s id e s of p a g e _______ 7. Indistinct, b roken or small print on several p a g e s . 8. Print e x c e e d s m argin re q u ire m e n ts______ 9. Tightly bound co p y with print lost in sp in e_______ 10. C om puter printout p a g e s with indistinct p rin t______ 11. P a g e (s )____________ lacking w hen material received, and n o t available from sch o o l or author. 12. P a g e (s )____________ se e m to b e missing in num bering only a s text follows. 13. Two p ag es n u m b e re d _____________ . Text follows. 14. Curling and wrinkled p a g e s ______ 15. O th er_______________________________________________ ________ ___________________ University Microfilms International DEVELOPMENT AND GROWTH OF SIX CONIFEROUS TREE SPECIES ON ABANDONED AGRICULTURAL SOILS IN SOUTHERN MICHIGAN By Ji Hong Kim A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Forestry 1983 ABSTRACT DEVELOPMENT AND GROWTH OF SIX CONIFEROUS TREE SPECIES ON ABANDONED AGRICULTURAL SOILS IN SOUTHERN MICHIGAN By Ji Hong Kim The W. K. Kellogg Experimental Forest of Michigan State University is an excellent demonstration of refor­ estation on land previously farmed and then abandoned in the early 1930s. This study was conducted to evaluate the performance of six coniferous species in plantings established more than 40 years ago. Included species are red pine, eastern white pine, Scotch pine, European larch, white spruce, and Norway spruce. Tree measurements, together with site characteris­ tics, were obtained from 35 field plots in unthinned and thinned stands. Understory plants were also identified in selected plots within plantations. The species varied in overall performance. All the selected plantations have been developing normally and have grown far above average, exceeding 7 cubic meters per hectare (100 cubic feet per acre) per year of merchantable volume in all unthinned stands. Thinning practices decreased the residual growing Ji Hong Kim stock, but increased diameter growth rate for all species. Total volume production has been identical between u n ­ thinned and thinned stands. Thinning is essential in overstocked stands to reduce mortality, to yield high quality crop trees, and to obtain intermediate income. The development of understory vegetation was out­ standing in Scotch pine and European larch plantations. Competition could not be avoided with well-grown hard­ woods in thesd stands. White pine in mixture with red pine, and European larch were damaged by insects and disease. A high rate of juvenile mortality also was recorded for white pine. The stagnated growth rate of European larch may be attributed in part to larch sawfly attack. Growth and yield performance between species must be drawn guardedly since the original experiments were not set up for inter-species comparisons. More research is needed to determine the comparative performance of different species on different sites for highly success­ ful reforestation. However, the study does suggest that red pine is the most generally reliable native timber species for plantations in southern Michigan, but it also suggests that with careful seed selection Norway spruce and Scotch pine will outgrow native species. Achieved with Soon Sung and Soerynn, dedicated to my father and mother, Mr. Y. K. Kim and Mrs. H. S. Choi. ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The author would like to express sincere appre­ ciation to Dr. V. J. Rudolph for his academic guidance, encouragement, and friendship that made completion of this study possible. Sincere appreciation is extended to Dr. L. M. James Chairman of the Guidance Committee, for sharing his exper tise in completing and writing this study. The author is also indebted to the members of the Guidance Committee--Dr. D. I. Dickmann, Dr. J. H. Hart, and Dr. M. R. Koelling, for their encouragement and assistance. He wishes to acknowledge the many kindnesses extended to him by supporting professors, especially Dr. J. B. Hart, Mr. W. A. Lemmien, Dr. P. G. Murphy, Dr. C. W. Ramm, Dr. D. G. Sprugel, Dr. L. W. Tombaugh, and Dr. J. W. Wright. Special thanks are extended to the author's parents-in-law, Prof. and Mrs. B. H. Lee, and Prof. T. S. Park at Seoul National University, for their con­ tinuous encouragement and moral support. The graduate assistantship from the Michigan Agricultural Experiment Station and the Department of Forestry is gratefully acknowledged. TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TAB L E S .......................................... vi LIST OF F I G URES......................................... ix INTRODUCTION............................................ 1 LITERATURE REVIEW....................................... 4 Red P i n e ..................................... White P i n e ........................................ Scotch P i n e ....................................... European L a r c h ................................... White Spruce...................................... Norway Spruce.................................... 4 8 12 15 18 21 THE W. K. KELLOGG EXPERIMENTAL FOR E S T ................ 25 Clim a t e........................................... S o i l .............................................. Topography........................................ History of Land U s e .............................. 25 28 30 31 DESCRIPTION OF STUDY PLANTATIONS...................... 33 STUDY M E T H O D ............................................ 47 Plot Selection................................... Data Collection.................................. Data Computation and Analysis................... 47 48 50 RESULTS.................................................. 54 Growth and Yield of Selected Plantations....... Number of T r e e s ............................... Diameter G r o w t h ............................... Height G r o w t h ................................. Basal Area Growth............................. Volume Gr o w t h ................................. Evaluation of Site Conditions................... Understory Vegetation............................ 54 54 57 60 62 65 71 75 iv DISCUSSION: PLANTATION EVALUATION.................... 80 Red P i n e .......................................... Mixed Red and White P i n e ........................ Scotch P i n e ....................................... European L a r c h ................................... White Spruce..................................... Norway Spruce.................................... 80 85 90 94 99 101 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION.............................. 105 APPENDICES A. Unit Conversions............................. 110 B. Volume Factors T a ble......................... Ill C. Trees and Volumes Removed by Thinning, and Total Volume Production..................... 112 Growth and Yield Data, and Site Characteristics, by Sample P l o t ............ 116 Numbers of Each Species of Understory P l a n t s........................................ 129 Species of Understory Vegetation............ 132 D. E. F. BIBLIOGRAPHY............................................. v 139 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Page Data for planting, replanting, and silvi­ cultural treatment by compartment in each plantation........................... 34 Number of plots and residual basal area in thinned plots.............................. 49 Selected plantations and number of sampling plots (10 m 2) for the study of understory vegetation..... •............................ 51 Average number of trees planted, thinned, residual after thinning, total produced in unthinned and thinned stands........... 55 Average diameter growth and average number of trees in unthinned and thinned stands, by species.................................. 58 6 . Average height, estimated site index, and average number of trees in unthinned and thinned stands, by species................. 7. Relative coverage (C), relative frequency (F), and species richness (R) for vegetational group, by plantation species 61 77 Appendix Table A. Unit conversion used for this study......... 110 B. Volume factors for basal area factor of 10. Volume in cubic feet including b a r k ....... Ill Cl. Trees and volumes removed in various time of thinnings and total volume production in unthinned and thinned stands of red pine at age 4 5 ................................... 112 C2. Trees and volumes removed in various time of thinnings and total volume production in unthinned and thinned stand of mixed red and white pine at age 5 0 .............. 113 Appendix Table (Con't) C3. Trees and volumes removed in various time of thinnings and total volume production in unthinned and thinned stands of Scotch pine at age 4 4 ...................... 114 Trees and volumes removed in various time of thinnings and total volume production in unthinned and thinned stands of Euro­ pean larch at age 4 5 ....................... 115 Dla. Number of trees, DBH, height, basal area, volume, and site index in unthinned red pine, by sample p l o t ....................... 116 Dlb. Site characteristics in unthinned red pine, by sample p l o t .............................. 116 D2a. Number of trees, DBH, height, basal area, volume, and site index for residual and cut in thinned red pine, by sample plot... 117 D2b. Site characteristics in thinned red pine, by sample p l o t .............................. 117 C4. D3a. Number of trees, DBH, height, basal area, volume, and site index in unthinned red and white pine, by sample p l o t ............ 118 D3b. Site characteristics in unthinned mixed red and white pine, by sample pl.ot........ 119 D4a. Number of trees, DBH, height, basal area, volume, and site index for residual and cut in thinned mixed red and white pine, by sample p l o t .............................. 120 D4b. Site characteristics in thinned mixed red and white pine, by sample p l o t ............. 123 D5a. Number of trees, DBH, height, basal area, volume, and site index for residual and cut by storm in unthinned Scotch pine, by sample p l o t .............................. 124 D5b. Site characteristics in unthinned Scotch pine, by sample p l o t...................... 124 vii Appendix Table (Con't) D6a. Number of trees, DBH, height, basal area, volume, and site index for residual and cut in thinned Scotch pine, by sample p l o t ......................................... 125 D6b. Site characteristics in thinned Scotch pine, by sample p l o t .............................. 125 D7a. Number of trees, DBH, height, basal area, volume, and site index in unthinned Euro­ pean larch, by sample p l o t .................. 126 D7b. Site characteristics in unthinned European larch, by sample p l o t ...................... 126 D8a. Number of trees, DBH, height, basal area, volume, and site index for residual and cut in thinned European larch, by sample p l o t ............. ........................... 127 D8b. Site characteristics in thinned European larch, by sample p l o t ...................... 127 D9a. Number of trees, DBH, height, basal area, volume, and site index in unthinned Norway spruce, by sample p l o t ..................... 128 D9b. Site characteristics in unthinned Norway spruce, by sample p l o t ..................... 128 E. Numbers of each species of understory plants found on all sampling plots, by plantation species......................... 129 FI. Species of understory vegetation in red pine stands...................................... 132 F2. Species of understory vegetation in the mixed red and white pine stand............ 134 F3. Species of understory vegetation in Scotch pine stands................................. 136 F4. Species of understory vegetation in European larch stands................................ 137 • • • VLXl LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Page Location of the W. K. Kellogg Experi­ mental Forest in Michigan................... 26 Map of the W. K. Kellogg Experimental Forest. Shaded areas indicate selected plantations.................................. 27 Mean annual basal area growth, average number of trees per unit area in unthinned and thinned stands, and basal area removed by thinning, by species..................... 63 Basal area per unit area in specified years after planting in unthinned stands, by species....................................... 64 Mean annual basal area increment per tree, and average number of trees per unit area in unthinned and thinned stands, by species....................................... 66 Mean annual volume growth, average number of trees per unit area in unthinned and thinned stands, and volume removed by thinning, by species........................ 68 Volume per unit area in specified years after planting in unthinned stands, by species....................................... 69 Mean annual volume increment per tree, and average number of trees per unit area in unthinned and thinned stands, by species... 70 Total volume production per unit area b e ­ tween unthinned and thinned stands, by species....................................... 72 10. The unthinned 45-year-old red pine stand 82 11. The thinned 45-year-old red pine stand....... 83 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. ix 12. 13. The unthinned 50-year-old mixed red and white pine stand............................. 87 The thinned 50-year-old mixed red and white pine s tand................................... 88 14. The unthinned 44-year-old Scotch pine stand.. 91 15. The thinned 44-year-old Scotch pine stand.... 93 16. The unthinned 45-year-old European larch s tand......................................... 96 17. The thinned 45-year-old European larch stand. 98 18. The unthinned 44-year-old white spruce stand. 100 19. The unthinned 44-year-old Norway spruce stand.......................................... 102 The 42-year-old Norway spruce stand in Compartment 2 3 C ............................... 103 20. x INTRODUCTION The establishment of vegetation is of great importance in the control and prevention of erosion on abandoned agricultural land by reducing the ex­ posure of bare soils and slowing down runoff. Not only for conservation of the soil, but also for forest production, planting trees plays an essential role in land use programs that are associated with natural resources. More beneficial and desirable outputs can be obtained from the resources with the same amount of inputs through creditable manipulation of the forest. It is necessary to develop appropriate establishment and maintenance criteria for the forest, corresponding with basic ecological principles, including the selection of tree species to be planted. Trees in a stand differ from each other because of interaction between genetic and environmental factors, but individual genotypic differences are less apparent and more difficult to discern among a group of the same species. However, different species have distinc­ tive growth potentials and characteristics when grown on the same site where growing conditions may be presumed to be uniform. The site consists of physical (atmos­ pheric, edaphic, and physiographic) and biotic factors 1 2 surrounding the forest community. Site factors and the forest community are closely interrelated with one another in terms of environmental interaction. Likewise, species selected for forest planting need to be compatible with these ecological factors of the site, but as these species become mature, the forest has positive influences through changing microenviron­ mental factors on the area where the trees are growing. It is quite difficult to understand and evaluate the sum total of the interaction among these environmental factors that make up the complex, but the growth rate of the forest stand is a good indication as to which factors determine site quality. On bare land once cleared for cultivation, the establishment of forest stands by planting trees is an example of the development of plant successional stages by human intervention. From an economic point of view, climax vegetation is not always the most bene­ ficial for us, but serai stages, such as a pine stand on a northern hardwood forest site, may grow faster than the hardwood forest and produce a higher yield of forest products. The present study of maturing coniferous planta­ tions was made at the W. K. Kellogg Experimental Forest near Augusta, Michigan. Managed by the Department of Forestry, Michigan State University, the forest is 3 an excellent demonstration of reforestation on eroded old fields. Twelve coniferous plantations, all more than 40 years of age, were selected for this study. They included red pine (Pinus resinosa Ait.), eastern white pine (Pinus strobus L . ) , Scotch pine (Pinus sylvestris L.), European larch (Larix decidua Mill.), white spruce (Picea glauca (Moench) V o s s ) , and Norway spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karst). The specific objec-tives of this study were as follows: 1. To evaluate the growth and yield of the six coniferous species used for reforestation in the W. K. Kellogg Experimental Forest. 2. To observe local site conditions in each plantation and their effects on stand productivity. 3. To examine the development of understory vegetation in each plantation and to deter­ mine differences in species composition among the plantations. LITERATURE REVIEW Red Pine Red pine (Pinus resinosa Ait.) is a species native to northeastern and northcentral United States and adjacent Canada. Red pine stands made up about a third of the 8.9 million hectares (22 million acres) of the pine forests that were in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota a century ago. Today, the species occupies a little more than 0.4 million hectares (1 million acres)--mostly in stands planted since 1930 (Benzie, 1977). It is increasing in popularity for planting because of ease of nursery culture and plantation establishment, relative freedom from insects and diseases in most areas, and high productivity on suitable sites (Buckman, 1962; Fowler and Lester, 1970). Red pine plantations are usually made only within its natural range (Fowler and Lester, 1970). However, moderate growth rates have been reported for the species planted in eastern Nebraska (Sprackling and Read, 1975), Washington (Silen and Woike, 1959), and New Zealand (Sweet, 1965). But high rates of failure characterize most red pine provenance experiments in Europe (Fowler and Lester, 1970). No varieties of red pine have been described, and the species is morphologically very 5 uniform with little genetic variation having been reported in the species (Mirov, 1967; Wright, et al., 1972). The narrow range of variation, including growth rates, survival, and wood quality suggests that an interpreta­ tion of traits may be more subject to uncertainties associated with non-genetic local environmental factors than with genetic factors. The genetic pattern is not usually apparent and it is difficult to relate to environmental data. As a consequence of its increasing popularity, red pine is now planted on many soils on which it was not native, or on soils formerly cultivated. Even though such plantations have generally been successful, some of them have failed or grown poorly, mainly because of inappropriate edaphic factors (Stone et a l . , 1954). Variation in reproduction capacity and growth rate of red pine have frequently been attributed to soil differences (Hannah, 1969). The high proportion of sandy particles is a charac­ teristic of the soil most often occupied by this species. Plantation development is usually best in coarse, welldrained, deep loamy sand or sandy loam soils (Horton and Brown, I960; Fisher and Stone, 1968; Stone, 1976; Stiell, 1978). Wilde and his co-workers (1965) reported that, on coarse sandy soils in Wisconsin, unless they had been depleted in fertility by previous agricultural 6 activity or repeated f ires, a red pine stand could annually produce more than 9 cubic meters per hectare (1 cord per acre) even on short rotations. Stone (1976) suggests that merchantable volume production on some well-drained and sandy nprthern hardwood sites could be doubled by conversion and intensive management of red pine plantation. The species is not suited to poorly drained soils which cause poor development of the root system and growth inhibition. Appropriate drainage classes, ranging from moderately well-drained to well-drained, are essen­ tial for its best development (DeMont and Stone, 1968). But it is evident that summer droughtiness reduces the growth of red pine, especially on upper slopes (Braekke and Kozlowski, 1975). However, red pine planted on sandy and relatively infertile soils grows well with minimum attention, simply because there is very little vegetative competition with other plants on such sites (Fowells, 1965; Stone, 1976). Once plantations are established, red pine stands need to be thinned periodically. Periodic thinning is essential to obtain optimum volume production, larger tree sizes, and better stand quality (Day and Rudolph, 1962; 1966; 1971; 1972; Dissemeyer, 1962; Morrow, 1974; Coffman, 1976; Wilson, 1979; Lundgren, 1981). Most thinning studies have emphasized the necessity of 7 periodic thinning, but there is still no general agree­ ment as to the stand density which will show the optimum growth results, especially for the first thinning. Three basic thinning methods in red pine plantations have been examined by a number of researchers; residual basal area, row thinning, and percent of height. In the residual basal area method (Lemmien and Rudolph, 1964; Day and Rudolph, 1972) removes every other row, every third row, or every fourth row. The percent of height method (Day and Rudolph, 1962; 1972; Diss- meyer, 1962) maintains average spacing between residual trees which is a specified percent of average dominant tree height. Thinning prescriptions for red pine plantations should be based on a guide that considers future stand development as well as rapid volume growth. A careful evaluation of alternatives is needed to determine the best course of action to meet management objectives. Day and Rudolph (1972) studied various thinning methods in a 32-year-old red pine plantation in the Hiawatha National Forest and reported that residual stand den­ sities of 20.7 to 23.0 square meters per hectare (90 to 100 square feet per acre) of basal area showed highest growth rate, while lower and higher densities showed less growth. Coffman (1976) noted similar results with the 20.7 square meters per hectqare (90 square 8 feet per acre) residual basal area treatment showing the highest productivity on a good site. (1981) recommends 27.5 square meters Lundgren (120 square feet) of basal area to maximize volume growth in Lake States. Row thinning, removing every third row, has been recommended by Lemmien and Rudolph (1964) for the initial thinning, to be followed by periodic individual tree selection thinnings on suitable sites for red pine. White Pine White pine (Pinus strobus L.) was one of the major timber species in Michigan during the early lumbering history of the State. Although the original growth has largely disappeared, white pine is still in high demand and is commonly used in plantation establishment. Barret and his students (1976) recommended the growing of white pine because of its high-level and sustained growth. Goldsmith and Barret (1973) have also reported favorably on white pine in New Hampshire, comparing it with lobolly pine (Pinus taeda L.) in southeastern United States. The natural range of white pine is broader than that of red pine which is confined to the area of the last Pleistocene glaciation (Cook, Smith, and Stone, 1952). White pine grows from Manitoba to Newfoundland 9 in Canada, and throughout northern and eastern United States from Minnesota to the Atlantic Coast and deep into the South along the Appalachians (Wilson and McQuilkin, 1963; Fowells, 1965). White pine has also shown successful growth as an exotic species in Europe, Asia, and New Zealand (Wright, 1970). White pine grows on practically all soils within its natural range. Like red pine, it is closely related with well-drained sandy soils (Horton and Bedell, I960; Horton and Brown, I960; Wilson and McQuilkin, 1963; Fowells, 1965; Stiell, 1978). The species occurs also on loamy and silty soils either with good drainage class or without hardwood competition during the estab­ lishment period (Wilson and McQuilkin, 1963; Fowells, 1965). Horton and Brown (1960) have indicated that the growth rate of white pine is not directly associated with soil texture, but finer-textured soils are generally superior to coarser-textured soils in water-holding capacity and available nutrients. In the latter point of view, the appropriate level of soil texture is essen­ tial for the optimum performance of white pine stands. White pine is not commonly found on soils with clayey-textured or poorly drained soils McQuilkin, 1963; Fowells, 1965). (Wilson and It is assumed that the high fertility of these soils has played a negative role in white pine plantations by encouraging the 10 development of undesirable vegetation. On the heavier soils white pine meets severe competition from many hardwoods, since several of these species outgrow and are more shade-tolerant than the white pine. On the lighter, sandier soils fewer hardwoods compete with white pine (Hawley, 1936). Likewise, in the soils with highly productive potential, rapid growth cannot be expected without intensive management of the planta­ tion (Wilde et al., 1965). This includes the elimination of external parasitic factors. Otherwise, the growth of white pine plantations is likely to be inversely related to soil fertility. White pine has been commonly planted in mixture with other species. It has been pointed out that mixed plantings have several advantages over pure plant­ ings. Mixed stands provide greater use of the productive capacity of the site, can result in the production of higher quality products, are less susceptible to serious insect and disease attack, have less risk of loss by fire, and have greater effectiveness in building up soil fertility (Hawley, 1936; Rudolf, 1950). Growth and development of white pine in mixtures with red pine have been examined by a number of researchers in the Lake States and northeastern United States (Stevenson and Bartoo, 1940; Hicock, 1942; Skog, 1951; Graiser and Merz, 1953; Rudolph and Lemmien, 11 1955; Rudolph et al., 1956; Grisez, 1968). Except for Grasier and Merz (1953), all experiments showed that white pine does not perform as well as red pine in survival rate and height, diameter, and volume growth. Graiser and Merz (1953) concluded differently, stating that white pine outgrew red pine. However, they based their experiment on only five dominant and five co-dominant trees on each of the 100 plots in Ohio and Indiana. Consideration of all trees of each species might have led to different conclusions. Rudolph and Lemmien (1955) had similar results in a 20-year-old mixed white and red pine plantation at the Kellogg Forest. However, they concluded that even though white pine was taller and had greater diameter in the dominant crown class, there were fewer white pine trees in this class due to poor survival rate. Consequently, white pine may not be an important component in the total stand structure. Grisez (1968) pointed out that soil drainage class is the major factor of growth between the two species in mixed plantations. On somewhat poorly drained soils, white pine showed better height growth than red pine, but on well drained soils white pine fell behind red pine. It is evident that suppression by red pine or other species is continuing to reduce the white pine component in such mixed plantations. The value of 12 mixed plantings with red pine may be expected to show up more definitely under particular site conditions and later on in the life of the stand. More studies are needed to bring out more clearly the advantages or disadvantages of mixing white pine with other species in plantations. Scotch Pine Scotch pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) occupies a natural range larger than that of any other pine species. It grows from Scotland to the Pacific Coast of Siberia, and from Norway to Spain (Wright and Bull, 1963; Mirov, 1967). It is natural to expect that Scotch pine is more variable genetically than any other species to be commonly planted (Wright et a l . , 1976), mainly because it grows over such a large area and under such different environmental conditions. Scotch pine has been planted fairly widely in the Lake States and elsewhere in the United States since early colonial times when the species was introduced to this country from Europe. It is well known that Scotch pine has its reputation for Christmas tree plant­ ings because of ease of plantation establishment, desirable tree form, unexacting site requirements, and excellent market condition (Wright et al., 1976). Scotch pine may also prove to have potential as a pulpwood or lumber 13 species in North America as it does in its native range. Some studies have reported that, if Scotch pine is properly managed, its growth rate is comparable to or may even exceed the growth of red pine or other native species (Grisez, 1968; Lemmien and Botti, 1974; DeHayes et a l ., 1980). Hundreds of hectares of Scotch pine stands intended for Christmas trees have developed beyond the Christmas tree stage in Michigan. Some, depending on seed source, may have potential for timber resources (Lemmien and Botti, 1974). Such stands can be managed to produce high quality pulpwood or sawlogs through cultural treatments. Rudolph and Lemmien (1959) obtained good response to thinning treatment in a 22-year-old Scotch pine planta­ tion in southern Michigan. They reported that thinning had significantly increased the diameter growth of crop trees. Even though Scotch pine has been found in extremely variable environmental conditions (Echols, 1958; Mirov, 1967) , the species demands similar site conditions to red pine and white pine for successful plantations in North America. Optimum growth may be expected on well-drained loamy sand or sandy loam soils et a l . , 1976; Homerich, 1980). (Wright The species shows slow growth rate or stunted form on poorly drained, heavytextured soils or deep sandy soils with poor 14 water-holding capacity. Mirov (1967) pointed out that the species grows well on infertile sandy soils without competition from other trees, but on more fertile and moist soils, Scotch pine growth may be suppressed by competition with hardwoods. In addition to selecting appropriate planting sites, the selection of appropriate seed sources is an important factor in successful plantations. and his co-workers Wright (1976) noted that, if the best seed sources are used, 10-20 percent more volume production can be obtained from Scotch pine than from native pine species. Provenance trials definitely indicate that hereditary characteristics are important in the growth of Scotch pine. Pest resistance and external tree form are also influenced by heredity. This is evidenced by a number of experiments in various regions of the United States. The studies provide good provenance information on which to base the selection of seed sources and varieties when Scotch pine is planted outside of its natural range (Wright and Baldwin, 1957; Wright and Bull, 1963; Ruby, 1964; Wright et a l . , 1976; Homerich, 1980). Wright and his collaborators (1976) have suggested, based on a Michigan provenance study, the varieties from eastern Czechoslovakia (v a r . carpatica) and from the region stretching over Belgium, northeastern France and western Germany (v a r . haguenensis) grow fast 15 and have good stem form. According to them, an average of 76 cm (2.5 feet) of annual height growth can be expected on good sites with these varieties in Michigan. European Larch European larch (Larix decidua Mill.) is a deciduous conifer, native to central Europe. Even though the range of the species has been extended by planting as far north as Scotland and Sweden, its natural distribution is confined from southeastern France to central Rumania, and north to central Poland (Hunt, 1932; M c C o m b , 1955). It was first introduced into the New England region in the middle of the nineteenth century, and has been planted over considerable areas in northeastern United States and eastern Canada (Hunt, 1932; Cook, 1939; Littlefield and Eliason, 1956; Lemmien and Rudolph, 1968; Barnes, 1977). A number of studies have suggested that European larch has greater potential for reforestation than native coniferous species or tamarack (Larix laricina) in the northeastern and Lake States regions of the United States and eastern Canada (Bushman, 1952; Cook, 1969; MacGillvrary, 1969; Sartz and Harris, 1972; Hall, 1977; DeHayes et a l . , 1980). In addition to studies in Europe, the relation of European larch survival and growth to soil properties has been investigated in the United States. McComb 16 (1955) noted that fertility and reaction of the soil were not significant to the species' site quality; 0 however, the soil physical properties relating to waterholding capacity and aeration were important to the growth of the species. European larch grows best on deep, well-drained soils with texture ranging from sandy loam through silt loam (Hunt, 1932; Aird and Stone, 1955; McComb, 1955). The species does not perform well on moisture-deficient soils' or clayey textured and poorly drained soils (Aird and Stone, 1955). It is not suitable for planting on wet sites where native tamarack often grows and his co-workers (Hunt, 1932). Nevertheless, Lemmien (1968) established a fairly successful plantation by planting on furrow slices on a wet site in southwestern Michigan. McComb (1955) noted that the species is also capable of growing on the alkaline, naturally calcareous soils as well as on quite strongly acid soils. Plantations established on cutover sites or bushy old-fields required weed control during the early develop­ ing stage for about 10 years (Hunt, 1932; Cook, 1955) due to the extreme intolerance of the species 1955). (McComb, Spacing for plantations must also be wide enough to obtain adequate survival and growth for this intolerant species (Morrow, 1978). Since red pine has been planted more than any 17 other species in the Lake States and northeastern United States, the performance of European larch is often compared with that of red pine (Grisez, 1968; Lemmien and Rudolph, 1968; Sartz and Harris, 1972). Even though red pine usually outgrows European larch on drier sandy sites (Grisez, 1968; Lemmien and Rudolph, 1968), European larch frequently shows better diameter and height growth on well-drained silt loam soils (Sartz and Harris, 1972). Cook (1969) also reported that on a suitable well-drained soil of loam texture in New York European larch was twice the height of red pine and Norway spruce only five years after planting. Both diameter and height growth tend to have a much wider range in European larch than in red pine (Lemmien and Rudolph, 1968). Sartz and Harris With this tendency, (1972) noted that the growth of red pine may not differ significantly with site quality, but that European larch growth varies significantly with site. European larch is a deciduous species which produces a large amount of litter cover with its annual needle fall. Sartz and Harris (1972) found that the amount of litter in a larch plantation was twice as much as that in a pine plantation. The thick layer of litter helps to insulate the soil against freezing and to aid the percolation of rainfall and melting snow. 18 Because of this hydrologic effect, European larch has a great potential for use in watershed management. Intensive site preparation, weed control, and insect and disease control should be carried out for successful establishment of European larch plantations (Cook, 1969; DeHayes et a l ., 1980). Besides cultural practices, the importance of using suitable seed source has been recognized for the species (Cook, 1955, 1974, 1975; McComb, 1955; Barnes, 1977). The variability of seed sources is closely related to the macroclimate of their origin, especially latitudial and elevational factors (Barnes, 1977). A desirable provenance is essential as recommended seed sources must be based on extensive testing over a wide range of environments (Teich and Holst, 1973; Barnes, 1977). White Spruce White spruce (Picea glauca (Moench) Voss) is medium­ sized and one of the most widely distributed native coniferous species in North America. The species ranges from Alaska to Newfoundland, in most of the boreal forest region of Canada, the northern Lake States, and New England (Fowells, 1965; Nienstaedt, 1957). Since the wood of white spruce has long fibers, the species produces pulp and paper products of high quality (Fowells, 1965; Nienstaedt and Teich, 1971). But it 19 has not been planted as widely as the pines in the Lake States, mainly because of slower growth rate and more exacting site requirements than pine species (King and Rudolf, 1969). White spruce grows naturally on a variety of soils ranging from heavy clays to alluvial plains where it reaches its best development (Fowells, 1965). However, the most successful plantations of the species occur on loamy soils which have optimum moisture and nutrient levels. If water relationships are not a limiting factor, the species will show moderate growth on sandy or clayey soils. It tends to tolerate a wide range of moisture conditions, but its growth will be stunted and scrubby on both very wet and very dry soils (Nien­ staedt, 1957). Wilde and his co-workers (1965) have agreed with these findings, and have noted that ex­ cessively well-drained, coarse sandy soils are generally unsuitable for white spruce. Most plantations in Wiscon­ sin supported by these soils have shown annual height growth of less than 23 cm (9 inches). These authors also pointed out that extremely slow growth can occur on fertile soils where competition from hardwood species is severe. In addition to a suitable site, the combination of a desirable seed source and adequate care after planting will result in high survival and growth (Wright 20 et al. , 1977; Nienstaedt, 1981). Variations in height and diameter development are often dependent on the seed origin. laborators In a Michigan study, Wright and his col­ (1977) have suggested that local seed sources are not always the best. Seed sources from Ontario, Quebec, and Maine have shown better growth, both in diameter and height, compared with Michigan seed sources. King and Rudolf (1969) have derived similar results from a study in northeastern Wisconsin. When established in an even-aged plantation, white spruce stands need thinning to increase growth rates, to reduce mortality, and to produce desirable crop trees. A number of studies have strongly suggested the necessity of thinning in plantations Frank, 1973; Stiell, 1980). (Stiell, 1965; Frank and Bjorkbom (1973) have recommended initial thinning at 25 to 35 years of age, followed by periodic thinning at 10-to 20year intervals for best results. Day (1972) also agreed that, in order to be biologically effective, thinning treatment should be done at an early stage in stand development and continued on a relatively frequent basis. In general, white spruce stands of various ages and in various locations have responded positively to thinning. Cleve and Zasada (1976) reported a signifi­ cant increase in basal area increment over the unthinned 21 control in a 70-year-old thinned stand in Alaska. By the end of the first growing season after thinning, the diameter increment in thinned plots was 2.6 greater than that in unthinned control plots. Rapid response to thinning has been also reported.in a 70-year-old stand in Maine by Frank (1973). He found evidence of response to thinning in the first year. Significantly different annual growth was noted in the third year after treatment, and growth differences peaked in the ninth year after thinning. It is evident that heavy thinning intensities result in greatly increased dia­ meter increment, especially in young stands. (1968) attained Berry maximum diameter increment with a residual basal area of approximately 19.1 square meters per hectare (83 square feet per acre) in a 30-to 35- year-old stand. Day and Rudolph (1974) used three different thinning methods for planted white spruce. Although all thinning treatments accelerated growth, removing every other row resulted in the greatest in­ crease in growth rate. It was also a more convenient thinning method than residual basal area methods. Norway Spruce Norway spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karst), a native of Europe, has a narrower natural range than Scotch pine, but the distribution has been extended by planting. 22 Norway spruce has been one of the first introduced and most widely planted non-native coniferous species in northeastern United States since the 1860s. Many of the first plantings were made with stock from Germany (Hosley, 1936). The species is characterized by a straight and seldom-forked stem and high wood quality, especially for pulp and paper. This suitability along with its good growth rate makes the species highly desirable for pulpwood plantations. The growth rate of Norway spruce has been compared with some native coniferous species in many field experi­ ments in the United States and Canada (Hosely, 1936; Hawley and Lutz, 1943; Hughes and L o u c k s , 1962; King and Rudolf, 1969; Hughes, 1970; DeHayes et a l . , 1980). The species is superior to native spruces and firs such as white spruce, red spruce, black spruce, and balsam fir. Compared with other conifers, Norway spruce has retained its reputation as a useful species for a planting in northeastern and northcentral United States, but not in the West (Fowler and Coles, 1980). One limitation in growing Norway spruce is its greater susceptibility to damage by the white pine weevil and the spruce budworm than native spruces. Winter injury and windthrow are also serious problems for plantations in some regions (Hosley, 1936; Grisez, 1968; Hughes, 1970; DeHayes et al., 1980; Fowler and Coles, 1980). 23 Norway spruce is capable of maintaining good sur­ vival and growth on appropriate sites in the Lake States and the northeast. The species requires loamy soils with an abundant supply of moisture and nutrients but with adequate aeration and preferably an acid soil for the best growth (Hosley, 1936; Wilde et al., 1965). The species is less suited to sandy, heavy-textured or poorly drained soils where slower growth will result. Moisture extremes should be avoided (DeHayes et al., 1980; Day, 1980; Fowler and Coles, 1980). Grisez (1968) reported an outstanding plantation (site index70) at the bottom of a slope on deep, moderately well to somewhat poorly drained silt loam soils. In addition to a suitable site, successful planta­ tions depends on careful control of competing vegetation in the early development stage (Wilde et a l . , 1965) and the use of nursery stock grown from seed of a desi­ rable provenance (King and Rudolf, 1969; Fowler and Coles, 1980). In the selection of a seed source, both high growth rate and resistance to adverse climatic and edaphic influences should be given consideration. Higher production than with many other species is possible when the provenance of Norway spruce planting stock is adapted to the climate and soils. King and Rudolf (1969) have suggested that Polish provenances are best for plantations in the Lake States region. 24 Since Norway spruce is a fairly tolerant species, the mortality is very low even in dense stands. stagnated growth because of overstocking, To avoid thinning is essential for increasing diameter growth and for producing high quality crop trees as well as intermediate yields (Hosely, 1936; Hughes and Loucks, 1962; Hughes, 1970). Hosley (1936) has recommended that even though a stand originally spaced 3 by 3 meters (10 by 10 feet) or wider may not need to be thinned before 50 years, a closely spaced stand should be thinned when dead lower branches constitute 50 to 60 percent of total tree height. Pruning also should be done to produce high quality crop trees because very little natural pruning takes place in this species. THE W. K. KELLOGG EXPERIMENTAL FOREST The W. K. Kellogg Experimental Forest, owned by Michigan State University, is located in Ross Town­ ship of northeast Kalamazoo County, Michigan (Town­ ship 1 South, Range 9 West, Michigan Principal Meridian) (Figure 1). The forest consists of approximately 234.6 ha (602 acres) of rolling land. The forest has been managed by the Department of Forestry since 1932. First efforts by the depart­ ment were to establish tree cover on the eroded hills that had been abandoned for agricultural use. The Kellogg Forest was selected for this study because it is a good example of land resource management with plantations of useful tree species on once abandoned agricultural land (Figure 2). Climate The climate at the Kellogg Forest is cool and humid, which is the general climate in the southern Great Lakes Region of North America. However, extremes of temperature are relatively uncommon. The climate is modified locally because of proximity to the Great Lakes. Prevailing westerly winds from Lake Michigan 25 26 E. Lansing Figure 1. Location of the W. K. Kellogg Experimental Forest in Michigan. * The W. K. Kellogg Experimental Forest 25A 2B 2A 27A 27D 27B 27C 4A 25B 28 4B 25C 25D 2C 26B 26A 8A 10 26D 26C ,17C 17A 29 20A 20B 22B 23 30 24 22A 23 23C 22C Figure 2. Map of the W. K. Kellogg Experimetal Forest. Shaded areas indicate selected plantations. 28 are warmed in the winter and cooled in the summer while crossing the lake, moderating the climate con­ siderably (Eichmeier, 1963). According to the meteorological survey record for a 20-year period at Kalamazoo, the summer average temperature is 21.9 degrees C (71.4 degrees F ) , and the average daily maximum temperature is 28.5 degrees C (83.3 degrees F ) . In winter the average temperature is -2.8 degrees C (27.0 degrees F ) , and the average daily minimum temperature is -6.9 degrees G (19.6 degrees F ) . The average annual precipitation is 87.4 cm (34.4 inches). Of this total, an average 50.8 cm (20.0 inches), or 58 percent, usually occurs during the warm season, from April through September. ages about 181.4 cm (71.4 inches) Snowfall aver­ (USDA, 1979). Soil The soils of the Kellogg Forest are the ultimate product of climatic conditions in this area. The soils in the forest differ from those formed in a moist and hot climate or in a dry and warm climate. The features of weathering, leaching, and organic matter decomposition, which are primarily regulated by climate, determine most of the soils' chemical and physical properties. The parent material of the soils on the area was 29 deposited by glacial drift of the Wisconsin age, formed in glacial outwash and morainic phases. Some of these materials have been shifted by subsequent action of water and wind. The soil properties vary greatly, depending on how the material was deposited. Irregu­ lar morainic relief is typical, composed of mostly sandy to gravelly, somewhat calcareous materials. The land is generally undulating to steep. Soils are mostly well drained or somewhat excessively drained; subsoils are sandy or loamy and sandy. The .soils of the Kellogg Forest are primarily Kalamazoo and Oshtemo series of the Hapludalf great groups. The Kalamazoo series (a fine-loamy, mixed, mesic, Typic Hapludalf) consists of well drained soils that are moderately permeable in the upper portion and rapidly permeable in the lower portion of the profile. They were formed from loamy material over sandy m a ­ terial. The surface layer is dark grayish-brown loam about 28 cm thick. The subsoil is dark yellowish- brown and dark brown sandy loam to clay loam about 110 cm thick. The available water-holding capacity is moderate, and fertility is correspondingly fair. Reaction ranges from medium acid (pH 5.6-6.0) neutral (pH 6.6-7.3) to a depth of 140 cm. characteristics of the Oshtemo series to The (a coarse-loamy, 30 mixed, mesic Typic Hapludalf) are very similar and adjacent to the Kalamazoo soils, but Oshtemo soils have less clayey material in the profile than the Kalamazoo soils and are more droughty. formed from sandy materials. They were The surface layer is dark-brown sandy loam 22 cm thick. The subsurface layer is yellowish-brown sandy loam about 25 cm thick. The subsoil consists of dark-brown sandy loam to yellowish loamy sand. ability is moderate. Average moisture avail­ The soil acidity varies from slightly acid (pH 6.1-6.5) to neutral (pH 6.6-7.3) to a depth of 170 cm or more. Topography The topography of the Kellogg Forest is mostly rolling and typical of the unstratified morianic hill forms, much like most of southern Michigan. Slope gradients vary, ranging from gently rolling to steep, occasionally as steep as fifty percent. Natural drain age of soil ranges from excessively drained on the ridgetops to very poorly drained in small depressions near Augusta Creek. The glacial deposits are so thick that no bedrock is exposed or occurs near the surface of the soil. In some cases the original topography has been modified by accelerated soil erosion caused by improper use of the land until the early twentieth 31 century. History of Land Use The area in which the Kellogg Forest is located was settled about 1835-1840. The land had been cleared for fanning or pasturing, except for 24.3 ha (60 acres) of hardwoods which were kept as farm woodlots. Agricul­ tural activity continued for many years prior to 1929, typical of land use history in much of southern Michi­ gan. The original hardwood forests, mainly oak-hickory type in this area, were cleared for agriculture by the end of the nineteenth century. Declining yields and income from cultivation led to abandonment of eroded farm land by the early 1930's. The abandonment of fields for farming was primarily due to misuse of the land which was too steep for agri­ cultural purposes. Serious degradation of the land and its productivity by erosion occurred when much of the fertile soil surface was lost. Mr. W. K. Kellogg and the Kellogg Foundation of Battle Creek purchased and donated the original property to Michigan State University in 1932. In succeeding years, Michigan State University has added to the forest, primarily by purchases from adjacent landowners. Mr. Kellogg expressed the desire that the property would be used to illustrate the rehabilitation and use of 32 such eroded land by appropriate land management prac­ tices. He thought that the land's productivity could be restored by forest establishment and management. Under the management of the Department of Forestry, forest plantations of many species have been established throughout the property. Most plantings have been established with research as well as demonstration objectives in mind. DESCRIPTION OF STUDY PLANTATIONS A total of twelve plantations of six coniferous species was included in this study: one mixed red and white pine stand, three red pine stands, two Scotch pine stands, three European larch stands, one white spruce stand, and two Norway spruce stands. These plantations were established between 1932 and 1940. All early established plantations in the forest are fairly successful and productive at this time. Detailed planting, replanting, and site preparation information for each plantation are listed in Table 1. Red and White Pine-Compartment 7 A red and white pine mixed plantation was estab­ lished with 2,990 red pine and an equal number of white pine seedlings on 3.6 ha (8.8 acres) in May, 1932. The area is characterized by gently sloping to very steep topography with gradients ranging from 5 to 30 percent. The general aspect is west. Before the planting was made, soil erosion had been so severe that several deep gullies had formed on the central portion of the area. The soil is composed of Oshtemo sandy loam on the steeper upper east portion and 33 Table 1. Data for planting, replanting, and silvicultural treatment by compartment in each plantation. Replanting Initial Planting Wo. of seedlings per ha. Stock used Spacing (mxm) Date planted No. of seedlings Stock used Spacing (mxm) Date plained 1.8 1,680 3-0 2.4x2.4 May ’32 395 2-2 replace Apr. White 1.8 1,680 3-0 2.4x2.4 Hay '32 8A 1.5 2,471 2-0 1.8x2.4 Apr. 9 2.4 2,306 2-0 1.8x2.4 May '36 1.8x1.8 O c t . '36 May •37 Compart­ Plantation ment Red & white pine Red pine Red Area (ha) '35 furrowing 7 15 Site preparation 2.5 2,511 2-0 Apr. 2-0 18 '37 3,000 2-0 1.8x1.8 Oct. ‘36 Pruning 1948 & 1952 Initial thinning 1968 furrowing 1960 furrowing 1960 furrowing scalping 1960 '38 1955 1955 Scotch pine European larch White spruce Norway spruce 20A 0.4 2,471 2-0 1.8x2.1 A p r . '38 8A 0.8 2,471 2-0 I.8x2.4 Apr. '37 furrowing 1965 13 0.2 2,471 2-0 1.8x2.4 Apr. '37 furrowing 1965 20A 0.2 2,471 2-1 1.8x2.4 Oct. '37 furrowing 1965 17A 0.3 2,318 2-0 1.8x2.4 May '38 11 0.4 2,347 3-0 1.8x1.8 Apr. •38 Apr. '40 23C 1950 35 Hillsdale sandy loam on the less steep lower west portion. The planting stock of both species consisted of 3-year-old seedlings, 13 to 25 cm (5 to 10 inches) tall, grown at the Michigan State College nursery, East La n ­ sing. The red pine seedlings were of fair quality with well developed tops and moderately well developed root systems, but the white pine seedlings were rather poor, with only fairly well developed root systems and some­ what spindly tops which had a pale green color. Vege­ tation at the time of planting was somewhat sparse, consisting mostly of June grass, goldenrod, sorrel and some annual herbs. 40 to 75 percent. This cover varied in density from The soil was moderately moist throughout the period of planting. The west half of the planting site was furrowed in a north-south direc­ tion where the sod cover was relatively heavy, ing in general cross-slope furrows. result­ The trees were hole-planted in the bottom of the furrow, using a shovel to open the holes. The remainder of the area was not furrowed; the trees were spot-planted in holes. The spacing was 2.4 by 2.4 m (8 by 8 feet). Even though initial survival was good, in April of 1935, 393 red pine trees, approximately 124 trees per hectare (50 trees per acre) were replanted where 36 the trees of the original planting had died. The planting stock was 2-2 transplants grown at the same place as the original planting stock. After an addi­ tional growing season, survival was 88 percent for red pine, based on the initial planting and replanting, and 57 percent for white pine. Silvicultural practices other than protection were confined to crop-tree pruning until the stand was 20 years old. In 1948, an average of 297 crop trees per hectare (120 trees per acre) were selected and pruned to a height of 2.3 m (7.5 feet). were pruned again, In 1952, these trees clearing an additional 1.5 m (5 feet) to a height of 3.8 m (12.5 feet). A thinning study was begun in 1968 to determine the optimum residual basal area for an older red pine and white pine mixed plantation. old at that time. The planting was 36 years The experiment was a randomized block design with six replicates and five treatments per block on 0.0405 hectare (0.1 acre) plots. unthinned control, Except for the thinning was done to residual basal areas of 20.7, 25.3, 29.8, and 34.4 square meters per hectare (90, 110, 130, and 150 square feet per acre). Remeasurements and further thinning were done in 1973 and 1978. Red Pine--Compartment 8A A red pine plantation was established with 3,800 seedlings on the west side of the main road in April, 1937. The area consists of 1.5 ha (3.8 aeries) char­ acterized by gently to moderately sloping topography, ranging from 3 to 15 percent slopes. Representative soils are Oshtemo sandy loam and Ockley loam, both in the well-drained class. The seedlings were planted in furrows plowed on the contour in the spring. The planting stock was 2-year-old seedlings grown at the College nursery in East Lansing. by 8 feet). good, The spacing was 1.8 by 2.4 meters (6 Since the initial survival rate was fairly it was not necessary to replant. A thinning study was begun in 1960 to evaluate the growth and yield of the stand. was 23 years old at that time. The plantation The thinning study in­ cluded other red pine plantations in Compartments 9 and 15. A randomized block design was used with four replicates and nine treatments per block on 0.0405 ha (0.1 acre) plots. The treatments were residual basal areas of 16.1, 207., 25.3, and 29.8 square meters per hectare (70, 90, 110, and 130 square feet per acre); row thinnings removing every other row, every third row and every fourth row with later selection thinnings 38 row thinnings removing every fourth row followed by removal of the center row in each group of three rows remaining; and unthinned controls. Residual basal area plots of 20.7, 25.3, 29.8 square meters per hectare (90, 110, 130 square feet per acre) and row thinnings removing third and every fourth row were remeasured and rethinned in 1967, 1974, and 1980. Residual basal plots of 16.1 square meters per hectare (70 square feet per acre) and alternate row thinning plots were remeasured and rethinned in 1970 and 1980. Red Pine--Compartment 9 Fifty-six hundred red pine seedlings were planted on 2.4 hectares May, 1936. (6 acres) of eroded steep slopes in The area is composed of a hill top and very steep slopes, ranging up to 45 percent gradients with the general aspect being southwest. The soil is a very gravelly and coarse-textured Oshtemo sandy loam in the well drained class. Since the area was severely eroded and sod had formed a heavy cover over most of the area, the planting site was furrowed on contour at about 1.8-meter (6-foot) intervals. The planting stock was 2-years-old seedlings in good condition with well developed tops and roots, grown at the College nursery in East Lansing. (6 by 8 feet). The spacing was 1.8 by 2.4 meters Trees were hand-planted in the furrows 39 with spades, planting bars, mattocks, and shovels. Records show that, in the fall of 1936, the m o r ­ tality rate was 53 percent:, and in the spring of 1937, the mortality rate reached 87 percent. For this reason, replanting was tried in October, 1936, where the trees of the initial planting had died. Three thousand red pine seedlings, mostly in good condi­ tion, were used for the purpose. by 1.8 meters (6 by 6 feet). The spacing was 1.8 The soil condition was very moist at the time of planting from frequent September and October rains. At age 23, this plantation was included in a thinning study with other red pine plantations in compartments 8A and 15. Red Pine--Compartment 15 A red pine plantation was established on the eastern portion of this compartment with 1,000 seedlings planted in October 1936, and 5,300 seedlings planted in April and May of 1937 on a total area of 2.5 hectares (6.2 acres). The area has varied topography. Slope on the area ranges from nearly level to steep, up to 35 per­ cent gradients. Most slopes face to the east and south. The soil is well-drained Oshtemo sandy loam with some gravel in a portion of the area. At the time of planting, the site appeared rather 40 sterile with little plant cover. The soil surface was severely eroded in some places. The planting stock was 2-year-old seedlings in good condition with adequate root and top ratios. (6 by 6 feet). The spacing was 1.8 by 1.8 meters Furrowing and scalping were employed for site preparation at the time of planting. pine plantations of this compartment, Unlike other the red pine plant­ ing was fairly successful so that it was not necessary to make replantings. A thinning study begun in 1960 when this plantation was 23 years old combined this plantation with other red pine plantations in Compartments 8A and 9. Scotch Pine--Compartment 18 Approximately 600 Scotch pine seedlings were planted in a part of this compartment in April, 1938. The site is characterized by moderately sloping terrain, ranging from 8 to 15 percent slopes. Oshtemo sandy loam. The soil is well-drained The planting stock was 2-year-old seedlings grown at East Lansing. The seed source is not known, but it was probably Germany or Belguim. A thinning study, begun in 1955 when the plantation was 17 years old, combined this plantation with other Scotch pine stands in Compartment 20A. Their total area is slightly more than 0.8 hectare (2 acres). The study was planned to determine an appropriate thinning 41 regime for pulpwood and sawtimber. The thinning has been done every 5 years, by cutting back to 14.9 square meters per hectare (65 square feet per acre) and 19.5 square meters per hectare (85 square feet per acre). thinned control was included in the study. An u n ­ The experiment was a randomized block with three replicates and three treatments per replicate on 0.0405-hectare (0.1-acre) plots. Crown thinning was done in 1955, 1960, 1965, and 1970. Although a severe ice storm damaged most of the plots in 1974, the study has been continued, and remeasurement and rethinning were carried out in 1975 and 1980. Scotch Pine--Compartment 20A A Scotch pine plantation was established in a part of Compartment 20A in April, 1938 on a gently sloping area, ranging from 0 to 6 percent gradients. is Oshtemo sandy loam and it is well-drained. The soil The planting stock was 2-year-old seedlings, but seed source is unknown. The spacing was 1.8 by 2.1 meters (6 by 7 feet), equivalent to approximately 2,570 trees per hectare (1,040 trees per acre). Mortality during the next 18 years after planting averaged about 30 percent, leaving around 1,730 trees per hectare (700 trees per acre). A thinning study in this and other Scotch pine stands in Compartment 18 was 42 begun in 1955 when this plantation was 17 years old. European Larch--Compartment 8A This European larch plantation, directly east of the main road, was established with 2,000 seedlings on approximately 0.8 hectare (2 acres) in April, 1937. The area is moderately sloping with 5 to 12 percent gradients, with the general aspect being west. The soils are Oshtemo sandy loam and Ockley loam, both in the well-drained class. The planting stock was 2-year-old seedlings, but the origin of the seed is unknown. by 2.4 meters (6 by 8 feet). The spacing was 1.8 The planting site was furrowed in a north-south direction to prepare for holeplanting in the furrows. The stand had shown good sur­ vival and growth for the first 20 years after planting. Average DBH of the stand was 15.0 cm (5.9 inches) and height was 11.6 m (38 feet) in December, 1956. With the objective of determining an appropriate thinning regime, a thinning study was begun in 1965 when the plantation was 28 years old. Other European larch stands in Compartments 13 and 20A were included in the study. The study utilized a randomized block design with three replicates and three treatments, including residual basal areas of 18.4 and 25.3 square meters per hectare (80 and 110 square feet per acre), and an unthinned control on each 0.0405 hectare(0.1 acre) plot. 43 The plots have been remeasured and rethinned every 5 years. For the past 15 years, the trees have been attacked by larch sawfly to some degree, but control measures do not appear to be practical at this time. European Larch--Compartment 13 A European larch plantation was made with other hardwood and coniferous plantings in this compartment in April, 1937. Five hundred larch seedlings were planted on 0.2 hectare (0.5 acre) of moderately sloping area with the general aspect being west. The soils are composed of Oshtemo sandy loam and Ockley loam of the well-drained class. The planting site was furrowed in a north-south direction. The planting stock was 2-year-old seedlings, and the spacing was 1.8 by 2.4 meters (5 by 8 feet). The seed source' is unknown. A thinning experiment was started in this compartment in 1965 when the stand was 28 years old, along with other European larch plantations in Compartments 8A and 20A. This stand has also been defoliated to some extent for the past 15 years by the larch sawfly. Some efforts were made to control the insect in this planta­ tion with a chemical spray with moderate success. European Larch--Compartment 2QA About 500 European larch seedlings were planted on 0.2 hectare (0.5 acre) in November, 1937 on an area with moderate slopes. The slopes range from 6 to 15 percent gradients with the general aspect being north­ west. The soil is well drained Oshtemo sandy loam. The site was furrowed in an east-west direction for hole-planting. The planting stock was 2-1 transplants, and the spacing was 1.8 by 2.4 meters The seed source is unknown. (6 by 8 feet). A thinning study begun in 1965 when the plantation was 28 years old, included other European larch stands in Compartments 8A and 13. This stand has also been damaged by larch sawfly for the last 15 years. Norway Spruce— Compartment 11 A Norway spurce stand was established in April, 1938, with 1,150 3-year-old seedlings. hand-planted on 0.5 hectare (1.2 acres). source is unknown. The seed The terrain is characterized as gently sloping to the west. Ockley loam. They were The soil is well-drained The trees were pruned to increase their quality in February 1950, when the planting was 12 years old. Long handled pruners were used and limbs were removed to an average height of 1.5 meters (5 feet). Except for the pruning, the plantation has not received 45 any other silvicultural practics. Norway Spruce--Compartment 23C A plantation of Norway spruce was made on a nearly level to gently sloping area of well-drained Oshtemo sandy loam soil. The seed source is not known. The stand has grown without any silvicultural treatments. Additional information is not available for this planta­ tion. White Spruce--Compartment 17 Seven hundred and fifty white spruce seedlings were planted on 0.3 hectare (0.8 acres) in May 1937, on a gently sloping area, ranging from 2 to 5 percent gradient. The soil is Ockley loam, well drained. planting stock was 2-year-old seedlings. 1.8 by 2.4 meters (6 by 8 feet). The The spacing was The seed source is unknown. For the first 20 years, many of the trees in this planting were stunted in growth and had very poor foli­ age color, especially the trees adjacent to a hardwood stand along the picnic area road. In the fall of 1958, 0-20-20 (N-P-K) fertilizer was applied to the four rows on the east side bordering the hardwood stand. In the fall of 1959, evenly mixtured 12-12-12 fertilizer was applied again to the trees in these same four rows and 46 ammonium nitrate (NH^NO^) was also applied to all trees in these rows. A home mixture of 15-20-20-fertilizer was applied to the remainder of the poorer trees in the plantation. Most of the sicklier-looking trees were in the eastern half of the stand. . Except for fertiliza­ tion, the stand has not had any silvicultural treat­ ment . STUDY METHOD Field data were collected during the summers of 1981 and 1982 from twelve plantations of six species, all older than 40 years. Planting and managerial information were obtained from records at the Kellogg Forest and interviews with the resident forester. Plot Selection Thinning studies have been conducted in planta­ tions of mixed red and white pine, red pine, Scotch pine, and European larch. Each thinning treatment was applied on permanent plots of approximately 0.0405 ha (0.1 acre). The mixed red and white pine stand has six blocks with five thinning methods; the red pine plantations have four blocks with nine thinning methods; Scotch pine and European larch stands have three blocks with three thinning methods each. The Norway spruce and white spruce plantations have rot had any thinning treatment yet, so one temporary 0.0405 ha (0.1 acre) rectangular plot was randomly established in each plantation. Among various thinning treatments, the most pro­ ductive treatment, in terms of periodic volume 47 48 production per unit area, was selected for comparison and analysis of growth and yield for the six species. In the red pine plantations, row thinning treatments were not included in this study, but only basal area treatments were selected.. The numbers of selected sample plots and basal areas are listed in Table 2. Data Collection Diameter at breast height (DBH)--137 cm (4.5 feet) above ground--was measured and recorded for each tree in each selected plot. Measurements were made with a diameter tape to the nearest 0.254 cm (0.1 inch). All basal area data and volume data were derived from the tree diameter measurements. Ten trees in each sample plot were randomly selected for measuring total height and merchantable height. For the last usable portion of the tree stem, merchant­ able height was taken to a minimum top diameter of 10 cm (4 inches). Height measurements were taken to the nearest 30 cm (1 foot) with a relaskop. These measurements were used for computing tree volumes. Edaphic and topographic data for each plot were collected to examine the effect of site condition on the growth of the species. A soil pit was dug at or near the center of each plot. depth, For each soil horizon, texture, and structure were determined, and 49 T a b le 2. Num ber o f Red p in e S cotch and C om partm ent num ber P lan tation Red & w h i t e p lots p in e resid u a l basal area in th in n ed p lo ts. C ontrol p lots T h in n ed p lots 8A 1 1 2 3 0 .0 (1 3 0 ) 9 1 1 2 3 0 .0 (1 3 0 ) 15 2 2 4 3 0 .0 (1 3 0 ) 7 6 6 12 3 0 .0 (1 3 0 ) 18 1 1 2 1 9 .5 (8 5 ) 20A 2 2 4 1 9 .5 (8 5 ) 8A 1 2 3 2 5 .3 (1 1 0 ) 1 2 5 .3 (1 1 0 ) 2 2 5 .3 (1 1 0 ) T otal no. p lots of B a s a l a r e a 31 n ^ /h a (ft^ /a c p in e European larch W h ite s p r u c e 13 1 20A 1 17 1 1 11 1 1 23C 1 1 1 Norway sp ru ce T otal * R esid u a l b a sa l 19 area for selected 16 th in n ed 35 p lo ts 50 the amount of gravel by volume was estimated. Depth to mottling was recorded and drainage class was also estimated. Procedures and field techniques in the 'Manual of Soil Classification' written by Lemme and Mokma (1980) of the Crop and Soil Science Department at Michigan State University were followed. Soil acidity was taken by a 'soil acidity field test k i t . ' Slope and aspect were observed and measured with a relaskop near the center of each plot. Recognizable understory vascular plant species, including grasses, sedges, herbs, shrubs, and trees were recorded by frequency, coverage, and density in each plot. For this purpose, a rectangular, square meters, sampling plot (2.24 m X 4.47 m) was randomly established on each selected plot. 10 All the plants in the sampling plot were identified and listed. Selected plots for the study of understory vegetation are listed in Table 3. Data Computation and Analysis Volumes of ten randomly selected trees in each plot were calculated and used to compute volume per unit area. 'Volume Factor Table' (Appendix B) with 10.0 basal area factor developed by Beers and Miller (1966) and area of circles in square feet were employed for volume calculations. 51 n T ab le 3. S e le c t e d p la n t a t io n s and number o f sa m p lin g fo r th e stu d y o f u n d erstory v e g e ta tio n . P lan tation Red p in e Red & w h ite C om partm ent number C ontrol p lots 8A 1 9 p in e 1 1 1 1 1 2 7 1 1 2 1 1 p in e European la rch 20A 1 8A 1 13 1 1 1 20A T otal T otal no. p lo ts 15 18 S cotch T hinned p lo ts p lo ts(1 0 6 2 1 1 1 6 12 of nr) 52 The volume factor table was constructed by the following equation, F Fv = V ( -G ) where Fv = volume factor V = tree volume in cubic feet F = basal area factor, 10.0 G = areas of circles in square feet = 4(144) D = DBH in inches Each tree volume was simply calculated using the transposed equation Fv • G V = ------F For a 10.0 basal area factor, the tree volume equation taken from Beers (1964) is: V = 92 f D(D+190) 68-H) ----- :--L 10 64 32 + — H where V = tree volume D = DBH in inches H = tree height in feet The CDC 6500 Computer at Michigan State University was used to analyze the results of the study. Regression, correlation, and analysis of variance for volume equations as related to diameter and merchantable height were performed for each plot and species. For every sample plot, all data for each individual tree was printed out by the computer, including diameter, area and volume in English unit. total height, basal In addition, the 53 average diameter, number of trees, average total height, basal area and volume were obtained in English units in each diameter class and total per unit area. The computer program was modified by Rudolph (1981). RESULTS Because of plantation differences in ages, site conditions, and silvicultural treatment, only limited statistical methods of data analysis could be used for this study. The conventional analysis of variance could not be employed for comparing growth among selected species, for development of understory vegetation, or for site groupings for a specific species. Therefore, the study results are presented in sets of tables in which the data on growth and yield are summarized with­ out statistical analysis for the selected species. Growth and Yield of Selected Plantations Number of Trees The average number of trees per unit area varied greatly from one species to another (Table 4). In stands where no thinning practices have been carried out, stocking ranged from 857 trees per hectare (347 trees per acre) in Scotch pine plantations to 1,717 trees per hectare (695 trees per acre) pine plantations. in pure red In Scotch pine stands, an average of 296 trees per hectare (120 trees per acre) were lost as a result of a severe ice storm in 1974, but 54 T ab le 4. A verage number o f u n th in n ed trees and th in n ed p lan ted , stands, th in n ed , resid u a l a fte r th in n in g , Stand age S p ecies R esid u al in 1981 in by sp ecies. U n th in n ed s ta n d s Trees p lan ted to ta l produced SD* su rv iv a l rate (trees/h a) T hinned R esid ­ u al in 1981 cu t by SD* t h i n n i n g SD* stands T otal trees produced SD* (trees/h a ) (%) su rvival rate (%) 45 2 ,4 2 9 1,7 1 7 77 7 0 .7 642 138 1 ,2 1 8 203 1,860 111 7 6 .6 Red 50 840 630 146 7 5 .0 358 75 341 76 699 100 8 3 .2 ... . W h ite 50 840 247 88 2 9 .4 ' 82 46 160 84 242 69 2 8 .8 B oth 50 1 ,6 8 0 877 106 5 2 .2 440 43 501 84 941 116 5 6 .0 44 2 ,4 7 1 1 ,1 5 3 * * 185 4 6 .7 329 14 1,2 6 7 203 1,5 9 6 262 6 4 .6 European la rch 45 2 ,4 7 1 1 ,3 6 6 299 5 5 .3 667 74 717 65 1,3 8 4 25 5 6 .0 W h ite s p r u c e 44 2 ,3 1 8 1,6 3 1 — 7 0 .4 Norway sp r u c e 43 2 ,3 4 7 1 ,1 8 6 140 5 0 .5 Red p in e , Red & w h ite p in e Scotch p in e * Standard d e v ia tio n f o r number o f ** In clu d es dam aged by i c e 296 trees tr e e s betw een p lo t s . storm in 1974. 56 these have been included in the residual trees shown. The highest proportion of planted trees remaining in unthinned stands, 75 percent, was recorded for red pine in a mixed red and white pine stand. This was influenced by some supplementary planting made three years after the initial planting to replace trees which had died. Similarly, the 71 percent survival rate recorded in unthinned pure red pine stands was affected by replacing one of the stands one year after the failed initial planting. The unthinned white spruce stand, however, had 70 percent survival rate without any replanting. Thinning treatment increased the total number of utilizable trees produced (residual trees plus trees removed in thinning) in red pine, in the red pine com­ ponent of mixed red and white pine, and Scotch pine. The total number of utilizable trees produced was not affected by thinning in either the white pine component of mixed red and white pine or in European larch stands. No white spruce or Norway spruce were thinned, so no observation regarding the effect of thinning on the number of trees produced can be made for these species. In general, it appears that thinning increases the total number of utilizable trees produced. Not only does thinning remove trees likely to be lost to mortality 57 over an ensuing time period, but also by lessening com­ petition in the stand it permits individual trees to survive and grow which might be lost if the stand remained unthinned. It is likely that different species can tolerate different degrees of stand density. More tolerant species can be grown at higher stocking levels. There­ fore, some of the variability associated with number of trees surviving among species should be accounted for by inherent characteristics of a specific species. For a given age and site, there is some flexibility between species in how many trees need to be on each unit area. Diameter Growth As expected, widely spaced trees in thinned plots have significantly greater average diameter than closely spaced trees in unthinned plots for every species (Table 5). The difference in average diameter between unthinned and thinned plots was at least 20 percent in all plantations. The greatest difference in average diameter was recorded in the Scotch pine plantations (35 percent), but this may not mean that Scotch pine stands had the largest response to the thinning prac­ tices. The two Scotch pine stands had been thinned earlier, in 1955, when the stands were 17 years old, Table 5. Average diameter growth and average number of trees in unthinned and thinned stands, by species. U n th in n ed Stand age S p ecies No. o f trees p er ha A verage DBH (cm ) stands MAI* (mm) T hinned SD **for MAI (mm) No. o f trees per ha stands Average DBH (cm ) A v e r a g e DBH d ifferen ce, th in n ed v s . u n th in n ed s t a n d s (cm ) Increased DBH b y th in n in g * * (% ) 45 1,717 1 9 .7 4 .4 0 .1 : 642 2 5 .2 5 .5 28 Red 50 630 2 5 .3 5 .1 0 .3 358 3 0 .3 5 .0 20 W h ite 50 247 2 7 .4 5 .5 0 .5 82 3 5 .5 8.1 30 B oth 50 877 2 5 .9 5 .2 0 .3 440 3 1 .3 5 .4 21 44 1,153 2 2 .9 5 .2 0 .4 329 3 0 .9 8 .0 35 European larch 45 1 ,3 6 7 1 8 .6 4 .1 0 .3 667 2 2 .8 4 .2 22 W h ite s p r u c e 44 1,6 3 1 1 7 .9 4 .1 — Norway sp r u c e 43 1 ,1 8 6 2 3 .2 5 .4 0 .7 Red p in e Red & w h ite p in e S cotch p in e * M ean a n n u a l d ia m e t e r i n c r e m e n t . ** Standard d e v ia tio n . *** In crea se u n th in n ed i n a v e r a g e DBH i n stands. th in n ed v e r su s u n th in n ed stands d ivid ed b y a v e r a g e DBH i n 59 and thinning removed a higher proportion of the original number of trees planted than in any other plantations in the forest. Mean annual diameter increment was calculated to adjust different ages (42 to 50 years old) for each stand. Since stand density showed great variety, it is hard to determine significant differences in diameter growth among six species. However, as shown in Table 5, diameter growth in thinned stands can be related to diameter growth in unthinned control stands. It is also possible to draw some inferences for species by examining growth only in the unthinned control plots. Mean annual diameter growth in the unthinned plots was greatest in the white pine component of mixed red and white pine (5.5 mm), but this observation must be tempered by recognition of the relatively small number of residual trees in the mixed stand. Red pine also grew well in the mixed stand (averaging 5.1 mm), but again this must be appraised against the low residual stocking of 877 trees per hectare. With greater residual tree stocking, Norway spruce (1,186 trees per hectare) and Scotch pine (1,153 trees per hectare) recorded mean annual diameter growth of 5.4 mm (0.2 inch) and 5.2 mm (0.2 inch), respectively. Pure red pine lagged behind in annual diameter growth, averaging 4.4 m m (0.17 inch), but this could be considered excellent growth in view 60 of the dense stocking of the residual stand (1,717 trees per hectare). With similar stocking level, Norway spruce outgrew Scotch pine, and red pine outgrew white spruce. Height Growth For each species, average tree height in thinned stands is more than in unthinned stands, but the differ­ ences are very small (Table 6). The largest apparent effect was in the white pine component of mixed red and white pine stand where thinning shows a 9-percent gain in average tree height. Site index, expressed by average total height in feet at age 50, was estimated for each species, based on a random selection of 10 trees in each plot. The limited sample for height measurement does not offer great reliability in the site index estimates for each species in unthinned plots, but the results show little range in site index by species. The lowest site index, 67, was recorded in a white spruce stand; the highest, 86, in Norway spruce. Scotch pine was second highest, with a site index of 78. Red pine, mixed red and white pine, and European larch varied narrowly in site index between 70 and 72. Table 6. Average height, estimated site index, and average number of trees in unthinned and thinned stands, by species. U n th in n ed sta n d s Stand age S p ecies No. o f trees per ha A verage h eig h t (m) MAI* (cm ) T h in n ed SD **for S i t e MAI in d ex (cm ) (ft) No. of trees per ha stands Average h eig h t (m) Average h t. d ifferen ce, th in n ed v s . un th in n ed s t a n d s (m) Increased h e ig h t by th in n in g * (%) 45 1,7 1 7 1 9 .4 4 3 .1 1.4 71 642 2 0 .1 0 .7 4 Red 50 630 2 1 .7 4 3 .4 1.3 71 358 2 1 .9 0 .2 1 W h ite 50 247 2 2 .0 4 4 .0 2 .2 72 82 2 4 .0 2 .0 9 B oth 50 877 2 1 .7 4 3 .4 1.5 71 440 2 2 .2 0 .5 2 S cotch p in e 44 1 ,1 5 3 2 0 .9 4 7 .5 1 .4 78 329 2 1 .8 0 .9 4 European la rch 45 1,367 1 9 .3 4 2 .9 1.2 70 667 2 0 .4 1.1 6 W h ite sp ru ce 44 1,6 3 1 1 8 .1 4 1 .1 — 67 Norway sp r u c e 43 1,186 2 2 .5 5 2 .3 0 .8 86 stands d ivid ed Red p i n e Red & w h ite p in e * M ean a n n u a l h e i g h t in crem en t. ** Standard d e v ia tio n . *** In crea se in average h eig h t u n th in n ed sta n d s in th in n ed v e r su s u n th in n ed by average h eig h t in 62 Basal Area Growth Annual basal area growth per unit area was signifi­ cantly and positively correlated with the number of stems in a particular species, and also varied by species (Figure 3). The least basal area accumulation was in thinned Scotch pine stands, 0.57 square meter per hectare (2.47 square feet per acre) per year. The greatest basal area increment was estimated in unthinned Norway spruce plantations, 1.23 square meters per hectare (5.36 square feet per acre) per year with 1,186 growing trees per hectare (480 trees per acre). Although no controlled comparisons are available in this study, mean annual growth differences, shown in Figure 3, can be noticed among selected species. In unthinned control plots, the plantations with larger numbers of trees per unit area and greater growing stock did not always have larger basal area increment. Norway spruce plantations had remarkable basal area growth with the same or smaller numbers of trees than other species. European larch and white spruce showed somewhat poorer basal area growth with fairly large numbers of trees per unit area. The inventory record in unthinned stands for basal area in specified years after planting (Figure 4) indi­ cated similar relationship to those shown in Figure 3. Red pine, in particular, has accumulated basal area 63 Unthinned stand ty ///// 1.5 -c ~|~ Thinned stand Standard deviation I 1 o w 0) o a> o in I 1.0 a _o "a 3 C C o 0) O) o w a> > < 0.5 No. of trees/ha Unthinned Thinned Basal area? remaved(m/ha) Figure 3. i I Europ. larcn Red pine Red & white pine Scotch pine 1,717 877 1,153 1,367 642 440 329 667 26.7 34.4 26.9 11.6 White spruce Norway spruce 1,631 1,186 Mean annual basal area growth, average number of trees per unit area in unthinned and thinned stands, and basal area removed by thinning, by species. 60 Basal area (m2/ha) 50 40 30 20 10 10 20 30 40 • Red pine * Red & white pine o Scotch p in e * x European larch ▼ White spruce + Norway spruce 50 Years a fte r planting Figure 4. Basal area per unit area in specified years after planting in unthinned stands, by species. Abrupt reduction of basal area indicates the ice storm damage in 1974. cr> 4> 65 over the years with relative consistency. Increment of basal area is of importance in thinned plots. Thinning practices have definitely accelerated the basal area growth rate per tree for all species, but lower residual densities showed lower basal area increment per unit of area. Figure 5 presents mean annual basal area increment per tree for thinned and unthinned stands. species, Among pine stand density had a clear influence on the mean annual basal area increment per tree. The smaller the number of trees per unit area, the greater the basal area growth for individual trees in both unthinned and thinned stands. In European larch and white spruce, mean annual increment per tree fell behind that in pine stands with equivalent or fewer trees per unit area. Volume Growth Volume growth, the primary indicator of performance in forest management depends on the rate of height and diameter growth and the amount of taper. It varies by inherent potential of a species to accumulate wood volume as well as by environmental and genetic factors. The merchantable volume production of all plantations in the Kellogg Forest has been very satisfactory, and in some cases, outstanding. In all unthinned planta­ tions, where no silvicultural practices have been 66 Unthinned stand ® ® '/////A 15 "J" E u Thinned stand Standard deviation C ® E ® o ® w o a in O n 10 o 3 C C O I ® O) o k. ® I > < No. of trees/ha Unthinned Thinned Figure 5. I Red pine Red & w hite pine Scotch pine Europ. larch White Norway spruce spruce 1,717 877 1,153 1,367 1,631 642 440 329 667 1,186 Mean annual basal area increment per tree, and average number of trees per unit area in unthinned and thinned stands, by species. 67 applied except for fertilization in the white spruce stand, volume growth exceeded 7 cubic meters per hectare (100 cubic feet per acre) per year (Figure 6). Outstanding unthinned stands of Norway spruce had an average merchantable volume of 549 cubic meters per hectare (7,846 cubic feet per acre) at age 43--a mean annual growth of 12.8 cubic meters per hectare (182.5 cubic feet per a cre). The least growth was recorded in European larch and white spruce stands, where annual volume growth averaged 7.7 cubic meters per hectare (109.3 cubic feet per acre) and 8.4 cubic meters per hectare (120.2 cubic feet per acre), respectively. Figure 7 shows the volume in specified years after planting in unthinned plantations for each species. Until the stands reach 25 years of age, there are no discernible differences by species in volume produced. Beyond that age, distinct growth differences developed. Results reflect those shown for mean annual volume growth in Figure 6. It is obvious that volume growth per unit land area was considerably reduced by thinning (Figure 6). This can be explained by the reduction in growing stock follow­ ing each thinning. However, volume growth response to thinning was apparent from the growth rates of individual trees in thinned stands (Figure 8). The growth response of 68 Unthinned stand ' / /// /// ~|~ 15 Thinned stand Standard deviation o -c "E * o ■_ TO o ja E I 10 o > “5 3 C C o ® O) a i. e > < 1 Red pine Red & white pine Scotch pine Europ. larch White Norway spruce spruce 1,717 877 1,153 1,367 1,631 642 440 329 667 Volume removed(m3/ha) 200.3 165.2 175.0 71.4 No. of trees/ha Unthinned Thinned Figure 6. 1,186 Mean annual volume growth, average number of trees per unit area in unthinned and thinned stands, and volume removed by thinning, by species. 500 Volume (m3/h a) 400 Red pine 300 200 White spruce N orw ay spruce 100 10 20 30 40 50 Years af t er planting Figure 7 Volume per unit area in specified years after planting in unthinned stands, by species. * Abrupt reduction of volume indicates the ice storm damage in 1974. vO 70 Unthinned stand y//////j "J" Thinned stand Standard deviation 15 o a» > E u O o o a> E 0) a 10 E _D O > "o 3 C C o a> 0) o w a > < No. of trees/ha I Unthinned Thinned Figure 8. ! Red pine Red & white pine Scotch pine Europ. larch 1,717 877 1,153 1,367 642 440 329 667 White Norway spruce spruce 1,631 1,186 Mean annual volume increment per tree, and average number of trees per unit area in unthinned and thinned stands, by species. 71 individual trees, affected by stand density as well as inherent characteristics, was greater in Scotch pine stands than in the mixed red and white pine stand and considerably greater than in pure red pine stands. In part, at least, this was due to earlier and heavier thinning of Scotch pine stands. In u n ­ thinned stands, volume growth was greater in the mixed red and white pine stand, followed closely by Norway spruce stands. Volume growth in unthinned Scotch pine lagged behind. Although overall performance for the life of the plantations showed many differences among species, total volume production in thinned stands, that is volume removed by thinning plus residual volume, did not reveal significant variation between unthinned and thinned stands for each species (Figure 9). This conclusion applies to each species individually and cannot be extended to make intraspecies comparisons (see Appendix Tables C1-C4 for detailed data applying to each species). Evaluation of Site Conditions Field plots showed growth differences within every stand selected for the study. There was approximately 40 percent volume growth difference per unit area between the most and the least productive plots in unthinned Norway spruce stands and 30 percent difference in thinned 72 Unthinned stand '//////, 600 Residual after thinning Removed by thinning Damaged by storm 500 •■V& m ■m o § 400 1 &■ JZ V E 3 o > $vi ill i 300 200 Stand age Figure 9. ■ I1 Red pine Red & white pine Scotch pine Europ. larch 45 50 44 45 White Norway spruce spruce 44 43 Total volume production per unit area between unthinned and thinned stands, by species. 73 red pine stands. Site quality can account for these growth differences. Site quality is largely determined by soil properties or other features of the site which influence the growth of trees qualitatively and quanti­ tatively. However, no definite statistical analysis of growth could be attributed to site conditions in this s tudy. White (1958) has noted that the amount and distri­ bution of available water is considered to be the limiting factor for forest growth. This suggests that not all soil properties are directly related to the growth of trees. It is more likely that water-holding capacity and available soil nutrients are closely associated with the performance of growing trees. Stone and his co-workers (1958) have also pointed out that soil drainage class provides a general correlation with growth, and best growth can be obtained in moderately well to well drained soils for most coniferous species. With these moisture-related points of view, differences in texture and drainage class would play a major role in determining the quality of the forest sites within uniform climate conditions. Soil properties varied somewhat by sampling plots (detailed site conditions and corresponding growth data for all individual plots are displayed in Appendix Tables D1-D9). However, there were no abrupt differences 74 in texture of the solum and in drainage class between plots in each stand. uniform. The soil factors were rather Most of stands were developing on sandy loam to loam soils with good drainage. Moreover, no site factors were found to correlate significantly with growth rate for any species. Growth tended to be poorer with increasing slope gradient of the site. This trend, although not strongly evident in tabulated summaries, was indicated by inter­ pretation of growth data by plots. Degree and extent of slope influence both surface and subsurface movement of water. Lower slopes have a greater potential supply of water than upper slopes and ridges with the same amount of precipitation. In unthinned red pine plantations, a gently sloping stand produced 53 cubic meters per hectare (757 cubic feet per acre) more volume than a steep sloping stand in Compartment 9 (Appendix Tables Dla and D l b ) . The difference between slopes was even greater in thinned stands; 205 cubic meters per hectare (2,930 cubic feet per acre) (Appendix Tables D2a and D 2 b ) . Scotch pine plantations also showed apparent differences in volume growth with topography in both unthinned and thinned stands--73 and 48 cubic meters per hectare (1,043 and 686 cubic feet per acre) more volume on gentle slopes versus steep slopes in unthinned and thinned stands, 75 respectively. Understory Vegetation The composition of understory vegetation in coniferous plantations depends mainly on climate and on the species available in the surrounding area to migrate into the plantations; it also depends on the soil, tree species planted, and the history of the stand (Hill, 1979). Coniferous plantations older than 40 years in the Kellogg Forest showed varying degrees of understory vegetation development. The data pre­ sented are from stands sampled in the summer of 1981 and are based on 10 m plots. 2 (2.24 m X 4.47 m) sampling Even though the size of sampling plots was large enough, the limited number of plots and unique­ ness of plantations have made direct comparisons diffi­ cult. Qualitative differences of understory vegetation among plantations were considered in the study. Species were grouped into grasses, sedges, and ferns; forbs; vines; shrubs; and trees. Table 7 shows relative coverage, relative frequency, and species rich ness data for vegetational groups for red pine, mixed red and white pine, Scotch pine, and European larch stands. The actual numbers of each species of under­ story plants found on sampling plots in red pine, mixed red and white pine, Scotch pine, and European larch 76 stands are detailed in Appendix Table E. For the same plantations, Appendix Tables F1-F4 detail relative coverage, relative frequency and relative density of all understory plants. Nomenclature follows Voss (1972) for monocots and Fernald (1950) for dicots and ferns. It is well known that mature stands of pines (Pinus species) and larches (Larix species) cast a lighter shade than those of spruces (Picea species), so that a larger density of understory vegetation is normally present in those plantations. There are vir­ tually no ground plants, except for scattered bryophytes, under the white spruce and Norway spruce stands in the forest (Figures 18-20). In the summer of 1979, 2,4,5-T mixed with water was sprayed on the foliage of all understory plants in the mixed red and white pine stand. Therefore,1 only scattered understory plants were present in the stand. However, the lower part of the slope, where moisture conditions are more favorable, showed relatively larger amounts of understory vegetation and greater species diversity than on the upper part of the slope. As shown in Table 7, 58 different understory plant species were recorded in all selected plantations. of those were exclusive to the red pine plantations, species were growing only in the mixed red and white Nine 11 T ab le 7. R ela tiv e coverage(C )*, r e la tiv e freq u en cy(F )**, v e g e ta tio n a l group, by p la n ta tio n sp e c ie s. G rasses sedges & fern s P lan tation sp ecies Forbs ** R e l a t i v e *** S p ecies 2 .2 - 8 4 7 .0 - - 2 1.0 D e f in it io n s ( a f t e r Brower and Zar, * R elative 14 3 0 .9 5 .9 3.9 5 .3 2 1 .5 0 .2 4 3 .1 4 1 .9 M ixed r e d & w h ite p in e larch 12 2 6 .6 5 .3 European R 1 1 .8 p in e F ( %) R Red p in e Scotch C (%) F ( %) F R (%) - 1 6 .8 Trees for T otal T otal R cover C (%) F (%) R 4 2 0 .7 3 6 .9 8 26 2 2 .5 /4 0 1 1 .8 4 4 6 .3 2 9 .4 9 31 1 3 .6 /2 0 2 2 .6 2 7 .3 4 7 6 .5 5 4 .6 8 14 4 7 .9 /2 0 1 7 .8 2 5 .5 7 7 9 .6 3 9 .2 11 31 9 2 .1 /3 0 R (%) F (%) 1 7 .5 1 0 .4 5 .9 2 1 9 .1 1.0 1 8 .2 2 1 .3 1 4 .4 3 C (m2/ m ) 1977) co v era g e— the cov erag e coverage for freq u en cy — the the r ic h n e ss (R )*** Shrubs V in es C (%) C (%) and s p e c ie s fo r a s p e c ie s group ex p ressed a l l sp e c ie s group. freq u en cy o f a g iv en sp e c ie s group as freq u en cies fo r a l l sp e c ie s group. r ic h n e s s — th e number o f s p e c ie s for a sp ecies group. as a p rop ortion a p rop ortion of of the total t h e sum o f 78 pine plantation, and 10 species were present exclu­ sively in European larch plantations. All species occurring in Scotch pine stands were found in all other plantations. Only two shrubby species (Ber- beris thunbergii and Rhamnus cathartica) and three tree species (Acer rubrum, Carya ovata, and Sassafras albidum) were growing in all plantations. The results indicated that understory cover was much higher in Scotch pine and European larch planta­ tions as compared to red pine or mixed red and white pine stands. Most of the understory plants in red pine and mixed red and white pine stands were shallow herbaceous plants. The richness of species for these stands was mainly due to the large number of annual and biennual forbs. Many herbaceous species occur in the red pine and mixed red and white pine stands, but the coverage of area is light. The cover of herbaceous plants was relatively unimportant in Scotch pine and European larch stands. No herbaceous plant species were recorded on sampling plots in Scotch pine stands, but all species groups occurred in European larch stands. It is more likely that, since larches are deciduous and have short needles, ground flora under larch trees can receive relatively more light for growth and development. 79 The shrub and hardwood layer was particularly well developed in Scotch pine and European larch plantations. Needle length of these species is much shorter than that of red pine and white pine, and crown of these species are more open than those of red pine, white pine, or spruces. Increased light favors the repro­ duction, growth and spread of shrubs and hardwood trees in the understory. A large number of woody species was present under the coniferous plantations. than 10 meters Some hardwoods were more (33 feet) tall. Crop trees have to com­ pete for soil moisture and nutrients with these unde­ sirable hardwoods, especially in the Scotch pine and European larch plantations. The dominant woody species included Ramnus cathartica (common buckthorn), Acer rubrum (red m a p l e ) , Cornus' florida (flowering dogwood), Prunus serotina (black cherry), and Sassafras albidum (sassafras). DISCUSSION: PLANTATION EVALUATION Even though this study yielded relatively comprehensive and detailed data on plantations in the Kellogg Forest, it was nevertheless only a survey of existing stands that had not been planned and laid out for the purpose of comparing selected species. Such standard experiment arrangements as replicated plots of each species of the same age on each of several specified site conditions were absent. How­ ever, the study can draw a general picture of how plantations of six coniferous species developed during their first 40 plus years on abandoned farm land can be drawn. Red Pine Red pine was the chief species used for refores­ tation in the Kellogg Forest. It has been an out­ standing performer, providing excellent growth and yield with a relatively low rate of mortality. While average diameter and height growth of red pine fell somewhat behind that of the Scotch pine, the volume and basal area growth per unit area showed excellent results, better than Scotch pine, and only slightly below Norway spruce (Figures 3 and 6). 80 Estimated site 81 index was 71 and 73 for red pine in unthinned and thinned stands, respectively. Average annual volume growth was 11.6 cubic meters per hectare (165.5 cubic feet per acre) in fully-stocked unthinned stands (Figure 10), and 7.3 cubic meters per hectare (104.5 cubic feet per acre) in thinned stands with 30 square meters per hectare (130 square feet per acre) residual basal area (Figure 11). The difference in volume growth between the most and least productive red pine plots in unthinned plantations was 10 percent, and in thinned plantations, 30 percent (Appendix Tables Dla and D 2 a ) . Since soil data showed relative uniformity among selected plots (Appendix Tables Dlb and D2b), no specific relation­ ships were found between volume growth and soil proper­ ties. Red pine stands established on appropriate soils, which can be characterized as well-drained sandy loams, can show high survival rates and good growth. However, it is obvious that topography had some effect on height and volume growth. Steep sloping stands, as in Compartment 9, showed considerably lower site index and smaller volume growth than did the less sloping stands in both unthinned and thinned plots. Growing stock was significantly reduced by thinning. However, with the passage of time, residual 82 Figure 10. The unthinned 45-year-old red pine stand yielded a merchantable volume of 512 cubic meters per hectare(7,446 cubic feet per acre). Site index was estimated as 71. Figure 11. The thinned 45-year-old red pine stand with residual basal area of 30 square meters per hectare(130 square feet per acre). age 23. The first thinning was done at 84 trees in thinned plots take advantage of the site potential, and the gaps in residual volume between thinned and unthinned stands decrease. if not thinned again, Eventually, the thinned stands will become as fully stocked as the unthinned stands. The differences in total merchantable volume production between unthinned and thinned red pine stands are slight. Similar results were obtained by Wilson (1963) and Coffman (1976) in red pine plantations. Day and Rudolph (1972) and Coffman (1976) noted that the lower residual densities, gen­ erally below 18 square meters per hectare (80 square feet per a c r e ) , resulted in considerably lower volume production than higher residual densities. A stand with a given volume of larger diameter trees is worth much more economically than a stand with an equal volume made up of smaller diameter trees. Thinning stimulates diameter growth. Earlier reports on thinning studies (Day and Rudolph, 1966; Day and Rudolph, 1972; Coffman, 1976) noted that heavier thinning resulted in greater dia­ meter growth. But Coorly (1969) reported that light thinning up to 34 square meters per hectare (150 square feet per acre) had little effect on diameter growth. Consequently, optimum thinning level would range from 18 square meters to 30 square meters per 85 hectare (80 square feet to 130 square feet per acre), depending on site conditions, silvicultural factors. stand age, and other In the same stands as this study, Lemmien and Rudolph (1964) proved that removing every third row was the most economical thinning method in terms of operation time and cost, but volume growth has been greatest in the residual basal area plots of 30 square meters per hectare (130 square feet per a c re). Total volume production of the thinned stands was around 529 cubic meters per hectare (7,560 cubic feet per a c r e ) , and residual volume was about 329 cubic meters per hectare (4,702 cubic feet per acre) with average diameter of 25.2 cm (9.9 inches) at age 45 in the Kellogg Forest. Mixed Red and White Pine Supposed advantages for mixed species plantations in lessening pest damage (Rudolf, 1950) did not apply to the mixed red and white pine plantation in the Kellogg Forest. According to the report by Rudolph and Lemmien (1955) , several insect species damaged the stand during the juvenile period. Sawflies (Xyela species) and tortrix (Lambertiana species) were ob­ served on the white pine; and European pine shoot moth (Rhyacionia species) on the red pine. White pine weevil (Pissodes strobi) was evident until the 86 plantation was 20 years old. Since the plantation was 10 years old, a condition described as white pine needle blight or "chlorotic dwarf" has been also obser­ ved in the stand. A large proportion of the mortality of white pine has been caused by these insects and disease. The survival rate for red pine in the mixed stand was 70 percent, although it should be noted that this performance was aided by replanting failed spots 3 years after planting. White pine, however, had a survival rate of less than 30 percent. Rudolph and his co­ workers (1956) noted that pure plantations of white pine, growing under similar site conditions in the same area, had not developed well either. Such plan­ tations have been subjected to repeated attacks by insects and diseases, resulting in high mortality soon after planting. However, the mixed red and white pine plantation has shown good overall growth, producing more than 500 cubic meters per hectare (7,146 cubic feet per acre) of merchantable volume at age 50 (Appendix Table C2). This represents a mean annual volume increment of 10 cubic meters per hectare (143 cubic feet per a cre). Average site index was 71 for the red pine and 72 for the white pine, the same as those estimated for pure red pine and European larch stands, but less 87 than those of Scotch pine and Norway spruce (Figure 12). Because of the high rate of juvenile mortality, the number of living stems per unit area and overall resultant production of the white pine fell far behind those of the red pine where the two species were planted in mixture by alternate r o w s . Species performance can be quite different when based on individual trees rather than unit area. As shown in Appendix Table D4a, which applies to trees in thinned plots, average diameter and height were larger for white pine than for red pine, especially on lower slopes. There is an indication here that, if growing conditions are favorable in space and site, white pine trees can outgrow red pine in mixed stands (Figure 13). Growth differences between the two species in unthinned plots are less than in thinned plots, but they do exist. Rudolph and Lemmien (1955) found that before thinning practices had been applied to the mixed stand height growth of white pine was significantly greater than that of red pine in the lower gently sloping portion of the stand where moisture conditions were more favorable. By age 50 there was not much difference in height growth between the two species. In contrast to height growth, average diameter growth was larger for white pine than for red pine, and the differences were considerable in the lower gently 88 Figure 12. The unthinned 50-year-old mixed red and white pine stand yielded a merchantable volume of 501 cubic meters per hectare (7,136 cubic feet per acre). estimated as 71. Site index Red pine is the major species component of this stand. 89 Figure 13. The 50-year-old mixed red and white pine stand thinned to a residual basal area of 30 square meters per hectare(130 square feet per acre). The first thinning was done at age 36. The tree being measured is a red pine, while tree No. 8 to the left is a white p i n e . 90 sloping portion of the stand. Even though white pine has shown excellent growth, the small number of growing stems reduces this species to unimportance in the stand. Rudolph and Lemmien (1955) pointed out that if the plantation had been established entirely in red pine, the site would have been fully utilized by the species and the area would have contained more volume than it does at present. Scotch Pine The survival rate for unthinned stands of Scotch pine was 47 percent at age 44, the lowest survival rate among the plantations studied (Table 4). This survival rate included trees damaged by a severe ice storm in 1974. The survival rate in Scotch pine stands thinned at age 17 was much higher, 67 percent. This indicates that early initial thinning can reduce sub­ stantially the high rate of natural mortality that can be anticipated in unthinned stands. Tree diameter and height growth were excellent in the Scotch pine stands. Scotch pine plantations, the seed source of which are unknown, had fairly high growth rate with lower stand densities, compared to other species. Mean annual increment in diameter and height were 5.2 mm (0.2 inche) and 47.5 cm (1.6 feet), respectively, in unthinned stands (Figure 14). Volume yield was less than in red pine and Norway 91 Figure 14. The unthinned 44-year-old Scotch pine stand. This stand was damaged by an ice storm in 1974. Site index was 78, and growing stock volume was 431 cubic meters per hectare (6,152 cubic feet per acre), including the damaged trees. 92 spruce stands on the basis of unit area (Figure 6), but Scotch pine stands contained the largest trees, especially in thinned plots (Figures 8 and 15). The large size of the Scotch pine could have been influenced by the fact that the thinning treatment given was the heaviest given to any species--a residual basal area of 19.5 square meters per hectare (85 square feet per acre). Despite considerable differences in tree diameters, total volume production recorded in thinned and unthinned plots was nearly identical (Appendix Table C 3 ) . Scotch pine stands typically have a relatively thin open canopy which permits a large amount of understory vegetation to develop (Grisez, 1968). Compared with the situation in red pine stands, shrubs and hardwood understories were well developed in Scotch pine plantations, but herbaceous plants were not abun­ dant (Table 7). Twelve woody species and two vine species were present on the two 10-square-meter (108square-foot) plots. Recorded total coverage was 48 square meters (517 square feet) in the two selected plots. Stand growth rates were variable by plots, but no specific site factors affecting growth performance were identified in the plantations except that less sloping sites had relatively better volume growth 93 Figure 15. The thinned 44-year-old Scotch pine stand. Thinning was done to a residual basal area of 19.5 square meters per hectare(85 square feet per acre) beginning at age 17. A large amount of understory vegetation is noticeable. 94 than more sloping sites. Since Scotch pine has great geographic variation and genetic diversity (Wright, 1976), collection of suitable seed sources is a major factor for success­ ful plantations in the United States. The variation and diversity in seed sources govern pest resistance, growth, and stem form for timber production. The stands in the Kellogg Forest have been fairly successful. There is an interest in managing existing Scotch pine plantations for timber production in the region, but there is still little attention to planting the species solely for timber production. There may be prospects for high quality sawlog production in this region with appropriate silvicultural practices and careful selection of seed origins. European Larch European larch has not shown high volume produc­ tion compared to other species. Diameter and height growth of this species were slightly better than for white spruce, but annual volume and basal area incre­ ment per unit area fell behind white spruce (Figures 3 and 6). Unthinned plantations produced approximately 344 cubic meters per hectare (4,919 cubic feet per acre) of merchantable volume, and 40 square meters per hectare (175 square feet per acre) of basal area after 45 years 95 on site index 70 (Figure 16). European larch is being increasingly used for reforestation in the Northeastern and Northcentral -United States. A number of researchers have suggested that growth of European larch exceeds that of native conifers on favorable sites, and that the species appears promising for timber production (Grisez, Cook, 1968; 1969; MacGillvrary, 1969; Sartz and Harris, 1972). The species has a reputation for its rapid growth during youth and middle age (Hunt, 1932; Cook, 1969). As shown in Figures 4 and 7, basal area and volume growth were comparable to other native or exotic species for the first 25 years. Beyond age 25, growth rates for European larch fell behind those for other species. Height and volume growth at Kellogg Forest were almost the same as in the Harvard Forest for trees of the same age (Hunt, 1932), but, diameter growth was less. Average diameter was 26 cm (10 inches) in the Harvard Forest, but only 19 cm (7.5 inches) in the Kellogg Forest, indicating that a larger number of trees have been growing in the Kellogg Forest than in the Harvard Forest. The European larch plantations were nearly de­ foliated by attacks of the larch sawfly in the early 1970s, probably accounting for the reduced growth rate. 96 Figure 16. The unthinned 45-year-old European larch stand. The stand has been somewhat de­ foliated by the larch sawfly for the last 10 years or more. Site index was 70, merchantable volume was 344 cubic meters per hectare(4,919 cubic feet per acre). 97 Cook (1969) has noted that there is no practical arti­ ficial control without broad-scale spraying with some effective and long-lasting insecticide. European larch with is native to Europe and Asia a broad natural range. In addition to the con­ trol of insects and diseases, appropriate seed sources should be considered to establish successful plantations in the United States. Since an unknown seed source was used for the planting in the Kellogg Forest, the species reliability and capacity of this species to grow well on good sites should European larch not be disregarded. has thin foliage and a deciduous character which permit the passage of relatively large amounts of light for abundant understory development (Figures 16 and 17). Of all the plantations examined in this study, European larch produced the greatest species diversity and coverage of understory plants (Table 7). meters Estimated total coverage was 92 square (990 square feet) based on three 10-square- meter (108-square-foot) sampling plots. Important tree species were Acer rubrum (red m a p l e ) , Prunus serotina (black cherry), and Sassafras albidum (sassafras). Some hardwoods were more than 10 meters tall and competed for soil moisture and nutrients with the larch crop trees. Understory competition probably reduced the growth rate of European larch. 98 Figure 17. The thinned 45-year-old European larch stand with residual basal area of 25.3 square meters per hectare(110 square feet per acre). The first thinning was done at age 28. Well-developed hard woods are noticeable. 99 White Spruce Because the study contained only one white spruce plantation, there is some uncertainty about the extent to which the poor performance of white spruce can be generalized (Figure 3). Tolerance of the species contributed to an excellent survival rate of more than 70 percent for 44 years (Table 4). Relatively poor diameter incre­ ment (4.1 mm per year; 0.2 inch per year) and height growth (site index 67) have made white spruce less successful than any other species evaluated in the present study. This is the only stand to which fertilizer was applied to relieve poor foliage color and slow growth. The fertilizer treatment, at age 21, might have reduced natural mortality, but the stand has not caught up in growth to other coniferous species in the forest. The well-drained loamy textured soil with gently sloping sites in the forest is supposed to be desirable for white spruce (Nienstaedt, 1957). However, white spruce is not native to this region, and inherent genetic factors of the species combined with other environmental factors may be responsible for the failure of white spruce to grow as well as other species at the Kellogg Forest. As shown in Figure 18, the white spruce stand is over-stocked and trees are 100 Figure 18. The unthinned 44-year-old white spruce stand yielded a merchantable volume of 370 cubic meters per hectare(5,290 cubic feet per acre). to be 67. Site index was estimated 101 strongly competing with one another for space, soil moisture, and nutrients. The lack of thinning may be a severe problem in the development of the stand. Norway Spruce The plantations of Norway spruce showed the best growth for all species, producing 12.8 cubic meters of merchantable volume per hectare (182.9 cubic feet per acre) per year. The plantations exhibit greater height, bigger average diameter, and larger mean annual volume increment than native species in Kellogg Forest. One outstanding stand in Compartment 23C, with site index of 90, yielded 695 cubic meters per hectare (9,932 cubic feet per acre) of merchantable volume at age 42 (Figure 20 and Appendix Table D 9 a ) . Even though the seed source is not known, and stands have not had any silvicultural treatment, the growth rate is considerably more than was reported by McArther (1964) in Quebec, by Hughes and Loucks (1969) and Hughes (1970) in New Brunswick, by Grisez (1968) in Pennsylvania, and by Day (1980) in Upper Michigan. No particular feature of the site or seed origin to achieve this outstanding growth was identified. However, the presumed reason for this excellent growth rate may be accounted for by the favorable site 102 Figure 19. The unthinned 44-year-old Norway spruce stand in Compartment 11 yielded a m e r ­ chantable volume of 403 cubic meters per hectare(5,759 cubic feet per acre). index was 81. Site 103 Figure 20. The 42-year-old Norway spruce stand in Compartment 23C. Growth performance has been outstanding, yielding a me r ­ chantable volume of 695 cubic meters per hectare(9,932 cubic feet per acre) with­ out any silvicultural treatment. index was 90. Site 104 conditions and climate of the region. The plantations were established on loamy textured well-drained soils and on the lower parts of slopes where moisture condi­ tions are favorable. Another unrecognized possibility is that the appropriate seed origin was introduced to the forest by chance. Since Norway spruce is a fairly tolerant species, mortality was low and the stands formed a very dense canopy. It is likely that over-stocking tends to stagnate growth rate. Therefore, thinning is essential to produce higher quality crop trees as well as to obtain intermediate yields. The excellent growth rate of Norway spruce at the Kellogg Forest suggests that this species should be considered in reforestation planning in the Lake States region on suitable sites with selected seed sources. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS A survey type of study was conducted in 1981 and 1982 in the Kellogg Experimental Forest of Michi­ gan State University. The area had been cultivated since the early nineteenth century and abandoned in the 1930' s because of decreasing productivity as a result of soil erosion. From 1932 the Department of Forestry has managed the area and established the forest with various tree species. The primary objective of the study was to evaluate the performance of existing plantations of six coniferous species--red pine, eastern white pine, Scotch pine, European larch, white spruce, and Nor­ way spruce. old. All the plantations are more than 40 years Tree measurements, together with soil and topographic characteristics, were obtained from 35 field plots in unthinned and thinned stands. All understory plants were also identified in randomly selected plots within plantations. Since different levels and times of thinning treatment were applied to each species, growth compari­ sons between species were made mainly in unthinned plantations. A further limitation in the growth analysis occurred because sites did not vary greatly, 105 106 within species or between species. Nevertheless, some generalization can be made. All selected plantations have been developing normally and exhibited growth rate far above those for similar plantations in other regions. There were no particular conditions which would preclude stand growth estimates. Average survival of species varied from more than 70 percent for red pine and white spruce to less than 30 percent for white pine in the mixed red and white pine plantation. In Scotch pine, early thinning could have reduced the high rate of natural mortality through intermediate cutting of poorly developed trees. Thinnings significantly increased diameter growth rate for all species. In spite of its high rate of mortality, white pine in the mixture stand with red pine had the greatest mean annual diameter increment based on residual trees in the forest. Poorest mean annual diameter growth was recorded in the white spruce stand. Height growth of trees in the unthinned plots was generally comparable to growth in thinned, dense stands. less Relative differences in height were as large as those of diameter growth among species. Norway spruce, with an average site index of 86, showed outstanding height growth, whereas site index 107 for white spruce was 67. Basal area in unthinned stands varied by species, ranging from 40 square meters per hectare (175 square feet per acre) in 45-year-old European larch stands to 55 square meters per hectare (240 square feet per acre) in 45-year-old red pine stands. Most of the unthinned plantations were fully stocked. Merchantable volume growth of all selected plantations exceeded 7 cubic meters per hectare (100 cubic feet per acre) per year. Red pine and Norway spruce were outstanding in volume production--averaging 512 cubic meters per hectare (7,446 cubic feet per acre) in 45-year-old unthinned red pine stands and 549 cubic meters per hectare (7,846 cubic feet per acre) in 43-year-old Norway spruce stands. European larch produced the least volume per unit area--344 cubic meters per hectare (4,919 cubic feet per acre) without thinning at age 45. Even though thinning practices decreased residual volume, there were no distinctive differences in total volume production between thinned and unthinned stands. Nevertheless, diameter growth rate was significantly increased by thinning, and large diameter trees are more valuable than small diameter trees per unit of volume. Thinning is essential in over-stocked stands to reduce natural mortality, to yield high quality crop trees, 108 and to obtain intermediate income. In addition to the inherent growth characteristics, susceptibility to insects and diseases would affect the selection of species for successful plantations. Two major species, white pine and European larch, were severely attacked by insects and diseases in the forest. The number of white pine trees in the red and white pine mixture was greatly reduced by attacks of white pine weevil and needle blight in the juvenile period. In the European larch stands, defoliation by the larch sawfly has been observed for more than the last 10 years. While the insect had not caused a high rate of mortality, the stagnated growth rate of European larch may be attributed at least in part to this insect. Because of their open crowns and short needle length, which are favorable for the growth of understory vegetation was outstanding in Scotch pine and European larch plantations. This might be considered an advan­ tage in wildlife management, but if timber production is the main goal, competing woody species in the under­ story could interfere with the growth of crop trees. Compared to the other plantations, the distinctly below average growth of European larch stands might be attributed to the dense development of understory woody plants as well as attacks by larch sawfly. Conclusions about the desirability of different 109 species for planting on abandoned, eroded agricultural land in southern Michigan can only be drawn guardedly from this limited study of plantations in Kellogg Forest. The limitations in plantations and site variability do not permit definitive conclusions, but several tentative recommendations can be given until better research information becomes available. Norway spruce showed best growth for all selected species. However, insufficient number of samples and small amount of the data provide no strong recommenda­ tion for plantations in the region. From an overall point of view, red pine is still recommended. This species is the most generally reliable native timber species for plantations in southern Michigan. Red pine has the capacity of surviving and making good growth on sandy loam, well-drained soils. But excellent growth from Norway spruce and Scotch pine shows that production from exotic species may exceed production from native species when the provenance of the exotic species is adapted to the soil and climate of southern Michigan. Other exotic species, specifically European larch and white spruce, cannot be recommended based on their performance at Kellogg Forest. APPENDICES APPENDIX A UNIT CONVERSIONS 110 Table A. Unit conversions used for this study. English to Metric 1 inch = 2.54 centimeters 1 foot = 0.3048 meter 1 mile =5 1.6093 kilometers 1 acre = = 1 square foot SS 0.4047 hectare 0.004047 square kilometer 0.09290 square meter 1 cubic foot = 0.02832 cubic meter foot per acre = 0.2296 square meter per hectare foot per acre =r 0.06997 cubic meter per hectare tree per acre 2 2.4711 trees per hectare 1 F degree = 0.5556 C degree Metric to English 1 centimeter = 0.3939 inch 1 meter = 3.2808 feet 1 kilometer = 0.6214 mile 1 hectare = 2.4711 acres 1 square meter = 10.7639 square feet 1 cubic meter = 35.3147 cubic feet 1 square meter per hectare = 4.3560 square feet per acre 1 cubic meter per hectare = 14.2913 cubic feet per acre 1 tree per hectare = 0.4047 tree per acre 1 C degree = 1.7999 C degree APPENDIX B VOLUME FACTORS TABLE Table B. Volume factors for basal area factor of 10. M erch an tab le h e ig h t DBH (in ch ) 6 12 18 2A 30 36 A2 Volume in cubic feet including bark. (ft) A8 5A 60 66 72 6 7 .2 6 7 .5 6 7 .8 6 8 .2 6 8 .5 6 8 .9 10A .A 1 0 5 .0 1 0 5 .5 1 0 6 .1 1 0 6 .6 1 0 7 .1 1A 3.9 1A A .6 1A 5.A 1A 6.1 1A 6.8 1A 7.6 1 8 1 .1 1 8 2 .0 1 8 2 .9 1 8 3 .9 18A .8 1 8 5 .7 2 1 5 .2 2 1 6 .3 2 1 7 .A 2 1 8 .5 2 1 9 .6 2 2 0 .7 2A 5.9 2A 7.2 2A 8.A 2A 9.7 2 5 1 .0 2 5 2 .2 2 7 3 .1 27A .5 2 7 5 .9 2 7 7 .3 2 7 8 .7 2 8 0 .1 2 9 6 .7 2 9 8 .2 2 9 9 .8 3 0 1 .3 3 0 2 .8 30A .A 3 1 6 .7 3 1 8 .3 3 2 0 .0 3 2 1 .6 3 2 3 .2 32A .9 3 3 3 .1 33 A .8 3 3 6 .5 3 3 8 .2 3 3 9 .9 3A 1.7 3A 5.8 3A 7.6 3A 9.A 3 5 1 .2 3 5 2 .9 35A .7 35A .9 3 5 6 .7 3 5 8 .5 3 6 0 .A 3 6 2 .2 36A .0 10 11 12 13 1A 6 9 .2 6 9 .6 6 9 .9 7 0 .3 7 0 .6 1 0 7 .7 1 0 8 .2 1 0 8 .8 1 0 9 .3 1 0 9 .8 1A 8.3 1A 9.1 1A 9.8 1 5 0 .5 15 1 .3 18 6 .7 1 8 7 .6 18 8 .5 1 8 9 .5 1 9 0 .A 2 2 1 .8 2 2 2 .9 22A .1 2 2 5 .2 2 2 6 .3 2 5 3 .5 25 A .8 2 5 6 .0 2 5 7 .3 2 5 8 .6 2 8 1 .5 2 8 2 .9 28A .3 2 8 5 .8 2 8 7 .2 3 0 5 .9 307. A 3 0 8 .9 3 1 0 .6 3 1 2 .0 3 2 6 .5 3 2 8 .1 3 2 9 .8 3 3 1 .A 3 3 3 .0 3A 3.A 3A 5.1 3A 6.8 3A 8.5 3 5 0 .3 3 5 6 .5 3 5 8 .3 3 6 0 .1 3 6 1 .9 3 6 3 .6 3 6 5 .9 3 6 7 .7 3 6 9 .5 3 7 1 .3 3 7 3 .2 15 16 17 18 19 7 1 .0 7 1 .3 7 1 .7 7 2 .0 7 2 .3 1 1 0 .A 11 0 .9 1 1 1.A 1 1 2 .0 1 1 2 .5 1 5 2 .0 1 5 2 .8 1 5 3 .5 15A .3 1 5 5 .0 1 9 1 .3 19 2 .3 19 3 .2 19A .1 19 5 .1 2 2 7 .A 2 2 8 .5 2 2 9 .6 2 3 0 .7 2 3 1 .8 2 5 9 .8 2 6 1 .1 2 6 2 .A 2 6 3 .6 26 A .9 2 8 8 .6 29 0 .0 2 9 1 .A 2 9 2 .8 29A .2 3 1 3 .5 3 1 5 .1 3 1 6 .6 3 1 8 .1 3 1 9 .6 33A .7 3 3 6 .3 3 3 7 .9 3 3 9 .6 3A 1.2 3 5 2 .0 3 5 3 .7 3 5 5 .A 3 5 7 .1 3 5 8 .8 3 6 5 .A 3 6 7 .2 3 6 9 .0 3 7 0 .8 3 7 2 .5 3 7 5 .0 3 7 6 .8 3 7 8 .7 3 8 0 .5 3 8 2 .3 20 21 22 23 2A 7 2 .7 7 3 .0 7 3 .A 7 3 .7 7A .1 1 1 3 .1 1 1 3 .6 11A. 1 11A .7 1 1 5 .2 1 5 5 .7 1 5 6 .5 1 5 7 .2 1 5 8 .0 1 5 8 .7 1 9 6 .0 19 6 .9 1 9 7 .9 1 9 8 .8 1 9 9 .7 2 3 2 .9 23 A .0 2 3 5 .1 2 3 6 .3 2 3 7 .A 2 6 6 .2 2 6 7 .A 2 6 8 .7 2 7 0 .0 2 7 1 .2 2 9 5 .6 2 9 7 .0 2 9 8 .A 2 9 9 .8 3 0 1 .2 3 2 1 .2 3 2 2 .7 32A .2 3 2 5 .8 3 2 7 .3 3A 2.8 3A A .5 3A 6.1 3A 7.7 3A 9.A 3 6 0 .6 3 6 2 .3 36A .0 3 6 5 .7 3 6 7 .A 37A .3 3 7 6 .1 3 7 7 .9 3 7 9 .7 3 8 1 .5 38A .1 3 8 6 .0 3 8 7 .8 3 8 9 .6 3 9 1 .5 111 A 5 6 7 8 9 APPENDIX C TREES AND VOLUMES REMOVED BY THINNING, AND TOTAL VOLUME PRODUCTION 112 Table C l . Trees and volumes removed in various thinnings and total volume production in unthinned and thinned stands of red pine at age 45. Y ear Num ber o f t r e e s / h .a A verage SD* B asal area (m2/ h a ) Average SD* V olum e (n?/ha) Average SD* T h in n ed s ta n d s Rem oved by 1960 457 142 8 .1 2 .7 3 9 .7 1 4 .1 1967 432 111 8 .2 2 .8 5 7 .8 2 2 .3 1974 229 55 6 .2 2 .5 5 8 .1 2 5 .3 1980 99 67 4 .2 2 .9 4 4 .7 3 0 .2 1981 642 138 3 2 .8 0 .8 3 2 9 .1 1 5 .7 1 ,8 5 9 111 5 9 .5 8 .8 5 2 9 .3 9 0 .5 1 ,7 1 7 77 5 5 .0 2 .3 5 2 1 .0 2 6 .5 th in n in g R esid u a l T o ta l p rod u ction U n th in n ed stands R esid u a l * Standard deviation of averages between plots. 113 Table C 2 . Trees and volumes removed in various thinnings and total volume production in unthinned and thinned stand of mixed red and white pine at age 50. Num ber o f trees/h a Year Average SD* B asal area (m'/'ha) Average SD* V olum e (m'/'ha) A verage SD* T h in n ed s ta n d s Rem oved by th in n in g R esid u a l 1968 (R ed (W hite (B oth 272 99 371 49 61 66 8 .8 2 .9 1 1 .7 2 .0 1 .7 1 .2 7 8 .4 2 3 .5 1 0 1 .9 1 5 .1 1 4 .4 8 .8 1973 (R ed (W h ite (B oth 62 45 107 41 43 40 2 .7 2 .3 5 .0 1 .8 2 .0 1 .1 2 6 .7 2 0 .4 4 7 .1 1 8 .0 1 7 .1 9 .8 1978 (R ed (W h ite (B oth 8 18 26 13 20 16 0 .6 1 .0 1 .6 0 .9 1 .2 0 .9 6 .1 1 0 .1 1 6 .2 9 .6 1 1 .4 8 .6 1981 (R ed (W hite (B oth 358 82 440 75 46 43 2 6 .1 8 .3 3 4 .4 5 .1 5 .4 1 .0 2 7 3 .4 9 2 .5 3 6 5 .9 5 3 .5 6 1 .8 1 5 .8 (R ed (W h ite (B oth 700 244 944 100 72 122 3 8 .2 1 4 .5 5 2 .7 5 .8 4 .7 2 .2 3 8 4 .6 1 4 6 .5 5 3 1 .1 5 4 .5 5 8 .9 2 1 .0 (R ed (W h ite (B oth 630 247 877 146 88 106 3 3 .0 1 5 .4 4 8 .4 6 .2 6 .0 1 1 .5 3 4 2 .2 1 5 8 .8 5 0 1 .2 6 4 .1 6 3 .9 2 8 .1 T otal p rod u ction Un t h i n n e d stand s R esid u a l * Standard 1981 d ev ia tio n of averages betw een p lo ts . 114 Table C3. Trees and volumes removed in various thinnings and total volume production in unthinned and thinned stands of Scotch pine at age 44. Year Num ber o f t r e e s / h ia Average SD* B asal area (ti?/ha) A verage SD* V olum e (ni^ ha) A verage SD* T h in n ed sta n d s R em oved by th in n in g R esid u a l 1955 363 136 4 .9 1 .6 1 7 .9 5 .4 1960 353 29 6 .2 0 .6 3 2 .0 4 .2 1965 272 25 6 .2 0 .4 4 3 .3 3 .9 1970 148 49 3 .8 0 .8 2 7 .8 7 .5 1975 99 25 4 .1 0 .4 3 7 .1 3 .5 1980 33 12 1 .7 1 .5 1 6 .9 1 4 .7 1981 329 14 2 4 .9 1.9 2 5 3 .5 2 0 .3 1 ,5 9 7 200 5 1 .8 3 .0 4 2 8 .5 2 7 .8 T otal p rod u ction Un t h i n n e d stands R em oved by storm 1974 296 24 7 .7 0 .9 6 4 .2 9 .0 R esid u a l 1981 857 207 3 7 .3 5 .1 3 6 6 .3 4 5 .7 1 ,1 5 3 75 4 5 .0 4 .5 4 3 0 .5 4 1 .3 T otal p rod u ction * Standard d ev ia tio n of averages betw een p lo ts 115 Table C4. Trees and volumes removed in various thinnings and total volume production in unthinned and thinned stands of European larch at age 45. • Year Num ber o f trees/h a A verage T h inned SD* •Basal area (n?/ha) A verage SD* V olum e (n?/ha) A verage SD* stand s Rem oved by th in n in g R esid u a l 1965 412 185 6 .2 3 .1 3 5 .1 1 9 .3 1970 173 89 2 .4 0 .9 1 2 .5 4 .6 1975 91 51 1 .8 1 .2 1 2 .4 9 .4 1980 41 29 1.2 0 .6 1 1 .4 5 .5 1981 667 74 2 8 .1 0 .5 2 7 3 .1 2 .8 1 ,3 8 4 25 3 9 .7 1 .3 3 4 4 .5 1 5 .0 1 ,3 6 7 299 4 0 .1 4 .1 3 4 4 .2 3 7 .9 T otal p rod u ction Un t h i n n e d R esid u a l stand s 1981 * Standard deviation of averages between plots. APPENDIX D GROWTH AND YIELD DATA, AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS, BY SAMPLE PLOT 116 Table Dla. Number of trees, DBH, height, basal area, volume, and site index in unthinned red pine, by sample plot. P lo t No. and C om partm ent No. of trees ( h a ' 1) A verage DBI1 (cm ) Average h eig h t (m) B asal area (in/ha) V olum e S ite in d ex (ft) (ma/ h a ) 5, Comp. 8A 1 ,8 0 4 1 9 .2 1 9 .1 5 4 .1 5 0 4 .7 70 7, Comp. 9 1 ,6 3 1 1 9 .7 1 8 .6 5 2 .2 4 9 2 .4 68 1, Comp. 15 1 ,7 5 4 1 9 .7 2 0 .1 5 7 .0 5 4 1 .3 73 3, Comp. 15 1 ,6 8 0 2 0 .3 1 9 .7 5 6 .9 5 4 5 .6 72 T a b le D lb . S ite ch a ra cteristics p lo t. P lo t No. and C om partm ent T exture A and B h o rizo n u n th in n ed red S o il depth A and B h o rizo n (cm ) p in e, by sa m p le Presence of gra vel** Slop e (%) A spect SW 5, Comp. 8A 5 .5 SL* 45 m uch 9 7, Comp. 9 5 .3 SL 64 m uch 32 W 1, Comp. 15 5 .5 SL 64 much 2 W 3, Comp. 15 ■p • 00 pH in SL 64 much 10 E * Sandy loam . ** P r e s e n c e none. of gravel b road ly d escrib ed by term s m uch, som e, lit t le , or 117 Table D2a. Number of trees, DBH, height, basal area, volume, and site index for residual and cut in thinned red pine, by sample plot. P lo t No. and C om partm ent 6, Comp. 8, Comp. 2, Comp. 4, Comp. T ab le No. o f trees ( h a ’1 ) R esid u a l Cut 8A q 15 15 741 988 T otal 1 ,7 2 9 R esid u a l Cut 766 1 ,1 8 6 T otal 1 ,9 5 2 R esid u a l Cut 469 1 ,4 8 3 T otal 1 ,9 5 2 R esid u a l Cut 593 1 ,2 1 1 T otal 1 ,8 0 4 D2b. S ite P lo t No. and C om partm ent Average DBH (cm ) 2 3 .8 Basal area (m ^ha) 1 9 .5 1 8 .7 2 2 .7 2 9 .8 2 1 .2 2 6 .7 ch a ra cteristics pH A verage h eig h t (m) 2 1 .0 in th in n ed 3 2 8 .3 1 5 7 .8 5 4 .6 4 8 6 .1 3 1 .6 1 9 .3 3 0 7 .3 1 2 1 .2 5 0 .9 4 2 9 .5 3 2 .9 3 7 .9 3 4 2 .8 2 9 1 .8 7 0 .8 6 3 4 .6 3 3 .3 2 8 .7 3 3 7 .8 2 2 9 .8 6 2 .0 5 6 7 .6 S o il depth A and B h o rizo n (cm ) 76 p in e, S ite in d ex (ft) (iri^ha) 3 3 .4 2 1 .1 red T exture A and B h o rizo n V olum e by Presence of g ra vel** 71 68 77 76 sa m p le p l o t . S lop e (%) A spect much 5 N much 31 W 6, Comp. 8A 5 .5 SL* 8, Comp. 9 5 .5 SL 114 2, Comp. 15 4 .0 SL 79 lit t le 3 S 4, Comp. 15 5 .5 SL 71 lit t le 0 - * Sandy loam . ** P resen ce or none. of g r a v e l b road ly d escrib ed by term s m uch, som e, lit tle , 118 Table D3a. P lo t No. in Comp . 7 Number of trees, DBH, height, basal area, volume, and site index in unthinned red and white pine, by sample plot. S p ecies No. of trees ( h a ~ 1) A verage DBH (cm ) A verage h eig h t (m) Basal area (iriVha) V olum e (m3/ h a ) S ite in d ex (ft) 1-1 Red W h ite B oth 519 272 791 2 7 .1 3 0 .0 2 8 .1 2 2 .3 2 2 .0 2 2 .2 3 0 .7 1 9 .8 5 0 .5 3 2 1 .1 2 0 8 .7 5 2 9 .8 73 72 73 2-4 Red W h ite B oth 568 222 790 2 6 .9 2 4 .1 2 6 .1 2 2 .6 2 3 .0 2 2 .6 3 3 .2 1 1 .4 4 4 .6 3 4 6 .7 1 1 3 .2 4 5 9 .9 74 76 74 3-3 Red W h ite B oth 519 272 791 2 5 .7 2 8 .5 2 6 .6 2 1 .5 2 2 .0 2 1 .6 2 7 .5 1 7 .9 4 5 .4 2 8 5 .4 1 8 6 .5 4 7 1 .9 71 72 71 4-1 Red W h ite B oth 717 173 890 2 6 .5 2 4 .3 2 6 .1 2 1 .1 2 0 .7 2 1 .0 4 1 .1 8 .4 4 9 .5 4 2 9 .0 8 4 .1 5 1 3 .1 69 68 69 5-4 Red W h ite B oth 890 148 1 ,0 3 8 2 3 .2 2 9 .2 2 4 .1 2 1 .0 2 0 .6 2 0 .7 3 9 .3 1 1 .0 5 0 .3 4 0 3 .9 1 1 4 .6 5 1 8 .5 69 68 68 6-5 Red W h ite B oth 568 395 963 2 3 .6 2 7 .3 2 5 .1 2 1 .9 2 3 .2 2 2 .1 2 6 .0 2 3 .8 4 9 .8 2 6 7 .7 2 4 5 .8 5 1 3 .5 72 76 73 119 T ab le D3b. S ite ch a ra cteristics b y sa m p le p l o t . P lo t No. in Comp. 7 PH in u n th in n e d m ix ed red and w h ite T exture A and B h o rizo n S o il depth A and B h o rizo n (cm ) Presence of g ra vel** S lop e (%) A spect 97 som e 2 W lit tle 8 NW NW 1-1 6 .9 SL* 2-4 5 .0 SL 100 3-3 5 .4 SL 76 m uch 13 4-1 5 .0 SL 81 much 7 W 5-4 5 .5 SL 89 lit t le 2 W 6-5 5 .5 SL 76 lit tle 1 W * Sandy loam ** P resen ce of g ra v el b road ly l i t t l e , or none. d escrib ed by term s, m uch, som e, p in e, 120 Table D4a. P lo t No. in Comp. 7 1-4 2-5 Number of trees, DBH, height, basal area, volume, and site index in mixed red and white pine, by sample plot. S p ecies No. of trees ( h a ' 1) Average h eig h t (m ) A verage DBH (cm ) 2 3 .8 2 5 .9 2 4 .4 3 1 .6 3 9 .7 3 4 .3 B asal area (m /'ha) V olum e (m ^ha) S ite in d ex (ft) 1 9 .5 1 5 .5 3 5 .0 2 0 6 .4 1 7 6 .2 3 8 2 .6 78 85 80 R esid u a l Red W h ite B oth 247 124 371 Cut Red W h ite B oth 296 99 395 1 0 .7 6 .0 1 6 .7 1 0 1 .8 6 0 .3 1 6 2 .1 T otal Red W h ite B oth 543 223 766 3 0 .2 2 1 .5 5 1 .7 3 0 8 .2 2 3 6 .5 5 4 4 .7 R esid u a l Red W h ite B oth 321 124 445 2 4 .0 1 1 .2 3 5 .2 2 5 3 .4 1 2 2 .5 3 7 5 .9 Cut Red W h ite B oth 297 148 445 1 1 .3 6 .4 1 7 .7 1 1 0 .8 6 0 .8 1 7 1 .6 T otal Red W h ite B oth 618 272 890 3 5 .3 1 7 .6 5 2 .9 3 6 4 .2 1 8 3 .3 5 4 7 .5 3 0 .7 3 3 .7 3 1 .5 . 2 2 .6 2 3 .8 2 2 .7 74 78 74 121 Table D4a (cont'd) P lo t N o. in Com p. 7 3-2 4-4 S p e c ie s N o. of trees (h a '1 ) A verage DBH (cm ) A verage h e ig h t (m ) V o lu m e (mJ/ h a ) 23.3 11.5 34.8 244.5 130.2 374.7 469 99 568 14.5 3.0 17.5 137.0 26.0 163.0 T otal R ed W h ite B oth 790 198 988 37.8 14.5 52.3 381.5 156.2 537.7 R e sid u a l R ed W h ite B oth 420 25 445 32.0 2.6 34.6 336.8 28.5 365.3 Cut R ed W h ite B oth 321 124 445 15.0 5.2 20.2 129.5 42.1 171.6 T o ta l R ed W h ite B oth 741 149 890 47.0 7.8 54.8 466.3 70.6 536.9 R e sid u a l R ed W h ite B oth 321 99 420 Cut R ed W h ite B oth 3 0 .3 38.6 32.2 31.1 36.3 31.4 22.2 25.3 22.9 B asal area (m V h a ) 21.2 24.4 21.4 S ite in d e x (ft) 73 83 75 70 80 70 122 Table D4a (cont'd). P lo t N o. in Com p . 7 5-1 6-3 S p e c ie s N o. of trees (h a-i) A verage DBH (cm ) 30.4 30.2 30.4 A verage h e ig h t (m ) 20.6 21.3 20.7 B asal area (m * /h a ) V o lu m e 32.4 1.8 34.2 339.6 18.7 358.3 (rn V h a) R e sid u a l R ed W h ite B oth 444 25 469 Cut R ed W h ite B oth 272 321 593 9 .9 11.1 21.0 83.8 87.6 171.4 T otal R ed W h ite B oth 716 346 1,062 42.3 12.9 55.2 423.4 106.3 529.7 R e sid u a l R ed W h ite B oth 395 99 494 25.1 7.4 32.5 259.7 79.0 338.7 Cut R ed W h ite B oth 395 173 568 11.1 5.5 16.6 104.6 47.0 151.6 T o ta l R ed W h ite B oth 790 272 1,062 36.2 12.9 49.1 364.3 126.0 490.3 28.3 30.3 28.7 21.9 21.0 21.6 Site in d e x (ft) 68 70 68 72 69 71 123 T a b le D 4b. S ite c h a r a c te r istic s b y sa m p le p l o t . P lo t N o. in Com p. 7 pH T ex tu re A and B h o r iz o n in th in n e d m ix e d red and w h ite p in e , S o il d ep th A and B h o r iz o n (cm ) P resence of g r a v e l* * S lo p e (% ) A sp ect 1-4 5 .0 SL* 102 lit tle 4 NW 2-5 5 .2 SL 122 som e 7 NW 3-2 6 .4 SL 97 som e 12 NW 4-4 5 .4 SL 51 m uch 8 NW 5-1 5 .6 SL 76 som e 4 W 6-3 5 .4 SL 81 som e 29 W * S a n d y lo a m . ** P resen ce or none. of g r a v e l b r o a d ly d e s c r ib e d by term s m uch, som e, lit t le , 124 Table D5a. Number of trees, DBH, height, basal area, volume, and site index for residual and cut by storm in unthinned Scotch pine, by sample plot. N o. o f trees ( h a -1) P lo t N o. and C o m p a rtm en t 4, Com p. R e sid u a l Cut 20A 3, C om p. Com p. T a b le 18 D5b. P lo t N o. and C o m p a rtm en t 21.2 1,260 R e sid u a l Cut 618 321 T o ta l 939 S ite 22.4 988 272 T otal 7, 20.2 1,261 R e sid u a l Cut 20A A verage h e ig h t (m ) 22.2 964 297 T otal ,A v e r a g e DBH (cm ) 25.0 c h a r a c te r istic s pH in 21.2 u n th in n e d B a s a l V o lu m e area (m J/ h a ) ( n ^ / h a ) 39.1 8.2 382.5 70.6 47.3 453.1 41.2 6.6 401.7 53.9 47.8 455.6 31.6 8.1 314.7 68.0 39.7 382.7 S co tch T ex tu re A and B h o r iz o n S o il d ep th A and B h o r iz o n (cm ) S ite in d ex (ft) 75 79 79 p in e , b y sa m p le p l o t P resen ce ,, S lo p e of m g r a v e l* * * A sp ect 4, Com p. 20A 5 .6 SL* 97 m uch 0 - 3, Com p. 20A 5 .5 L** 89 m uch 0 - 7, Com p. 18 5 .6 SL 91 som e 10 * Sandy W lo a m . * * Loam *** Presence of gravel broadly described by terms much, some, little, or none. 125 Table D6a. Number of trees, DBH, height, basal area, volume, and site index for residual and cut in thinned Scotch pine, by sample plot P lo t N o. and C om p artm en t 5, Com p. 1, Com p. 9, C om p. N o. of trees ( h a * 1) 20A 20A 18 T a b le D 6b. R e sid u a l Cut 321 1,458 T o ta l 1,779 R e sid u a l Cut 345 1,285 T o ta l 1,630 R e sid u a l Cut 321 1,063 T o ta l 1,384 S ite P lo t N o. and C o m p a rtm en t A verage B asal area h e ig h t (m ) (in /h a ) 30.9 21.9 31.4 21.0 22.4 30.3 c h a r a c te r istic s pH A verage DBH (cm ) in T ex tu re A and B h o r iz o n th in n e d S co tch S o il d ep th A and B h o r iz o n (cm ) V o lu m e (m ^ ha) 24.3 27.3 246.7 165.0 51.6 411.7 27.1 27.8 276.2 184.4 54.9 460.6 23.5 25.3 237.3 175.8 48.8 413.1 p in e , by S ite in d e x (ft) 82 78 83 sa m p le p l o t P resen ce S lo p e of g r a v e l* ** A sp ect 5, Com p. 20A 5 .4 L* 81 som e 1 - 1, Com p. 20A 5 .5 SL** 89 m uch 0 - 9, Com p. 18 5 .5 SL 89 som e 11 W * Loam . ** S a n d y lo a m . *** Presence of gravel broadly described by terms much, some, little, or none. 126 Table D7a. Number of trees, DBH, height, basal area, volume and site index in unthinned European larch, by sample plot. P lo t N o. and C o m p a rtm en t N o. of trees ( h a ' 1) A verage D BH (cm ) A verage h e ig h t (m ) B asal area (m2/ h a ) V o lu m e (rn ^ h a ) Site in d ex (ft) 5, Com p. 8A 1,260 18.3 18.7 35.5 301.2 68 8, Com p. 13 1,137 20.4 19.8 41.3 372.8 72 1, Com p. 20A 1,705 17.6 19.2 43.5 358.6 72 u n th in n e d E uropean S ite c h a r a c te r istic s plot. T a b le D 7b. P lo t N o. and C o m p a rtm en t in pH T ex tu re A and B h o r iz o n S o il d ep th A and B h o r iz o n (cm ) la r c h , by P resen ce c S lo p e of g r a v e l * * * (% ) sa m p le A sp ect 5, Com p. 8A 5 .4 L* 89 som e 7 W 8, Com p. 13 5 .4 SL** 81 lit t le 5 w 1, Com p. 20A 5 .3 L 85 lit t le 7 N d e sc r ib e d by * Loam . ** Sandy lo a m . *** P resen ce or none. of g r a v e l b r o a d ly term s m uch, som e, lit t le , 127 Table D8a. Number of trees, DBH, height, basal area, volume, and site index for residual and cut in thinned European larch, by sample plot. P lo t N o. and C o m p a rtm en t 6, Com p. N o. o f trees (h a -1) R e sid u a l Cut 8A 20A ^Ut P lo t N o. and C o m p a rtm en t S ite p lo t 21.8 741 642 T o ta l T a b le D 8b. 20.6 1,359 R e sid u a l Com o. 24.1 593 766 T o ta l 2. 20.1 1,408 R e sid u a l Cut C om p. 8A B asal area (m2/ h a ) A verage h e ig h t (m ) 22.6 667 741 T otal 7, A verage DBH (cm ) 20.5 1,383 c h a r a c te r istic s pH in th in n e d E uropean T ex tu re A and B h o r iz o n S o il d ep th A and B h o r iz o n (cm ) V o lu m e (n iV h a ) 27.8 10.2 271.6 55.6 38.0 327.2 27.4 13.1 271.2 82.8 40.5 354.0 28.6 11.6 276.3 76.1 40.2 352.4 la r c h , P resen ce of g r a v e l* * by Site in d ex (ft) 73 76 76 sa m p le S lo p e (% ) A sp ect 6, Com p. 8A 5 .4 L* 76 som e 7 W 7, Com p. 8A 5 .4 L 64 lit t le 6 W 2, Com p. 20A 5 .5 L 89 lit t le 8 N * Loam . ** Presence of gravel broadly described by terms much, some, little, or none. 128 Table D9a. Number of trees, DBH, height, basal area, volume, and site index in unthinned Norway spruce, by samle plot. N o. o f trees ( h a " 1) C o m p a rtm en t A verage DBH (cm ) A verage h e ig h t (m ) B asal area (n f/h a ) V o lu m e (r n ^ /h a ) Site in d ex (ft) C om p. 11 1,087 21.0 21.9 40.2 403.0 81 Com p. 23C 1,285 25.0 23.2 65.6 695.0 90 T a b le D 9b. S ite c h a r a c te r istic s sa m p le p l o t . pH C om p artm en t in u n th in n e d N orw ay s p r u c e , T ex tu re A and B h o r iz o n S o il d ep th A and B h o r iz o n (cm ) Com p. 11 5 .8 L* 76 Com p. 23C 5 .0 L 122 P resen ce ° f g r a v e l* * by S lo p e (7k A sp ect lit t le 3 W none 0 - * Loam . ** P resen ce or none. of g r a v e l b r o a d ly d e sc r ib e d by term s m uch, som e, lit tle , APPENDIX E NUMBERS OF EACH SPECIES OF UNDERSTORY PLANTS 129 T a b le E. N um bers o f e a c h sa m p lin g p l o t s , s p e c ie s o f u n d ersto ry p la n ts by p la n ta tio n s p e c ie s . R ed p in e S p e c ie s G rasses, sed ges, & f e r n s (3) C arex p e n n sy lv a n ic a D a c ty lis g lo m e r a ta D r y o p te r is R ed & w h ite p in e Lam L. sp in u lo sa (D . F. M uell.) W att 4 F o r b s(2 5 ) A n te n n a r ia n e g le c t a G reene A pocynum a n d r o sa e m ifo liu m A r c tiu m A sarum A ster m in u s (H ill) can ad en se L. B ernh. L. 21 L. C ir c a e a 7 q u a d r i s u l c a t a (M a x im .) Franch. & Sav. D e sm o d iu m g lu tin o su m (M u h l. ) 2 W ood 9 F r a g a r ia L. G a liu m c ir c a e z a n s G a liu m co n cin n u m G a liu m tr ifid u m M ic h x T. & G. 1 L. 2 H ie r a c iu m L. 5 L aspedeza repens 2 O sm o r h iz a lo n g isty lis Phrym a le p to s ta c h y a P h y to la c c a 5 1 L. 3 L. a lb a R um ex a c e t o c e l l a S e n e c io L. DC a m e r ic a n a L . P la n ta g o m a jo r P ren an th es (T orr.) 4 2 L. L. 2 18 4 fo u n d on a ll S co tch p in e Europ. la rc h 130 Table E (cont'd) R ed p in e S p e c ie s S m ila c in a racem osa T araxacum o ffic in a le T r illiu m V e r c in a (L .) o ffic in a lis D esf. Scotch p in e 1 W eber g r a n d iflo r u m R ed & w h ite p in e Europ. la rc h 4 4 (M ich a u x ) S a lisb L. 1 1 V in e s (4 ) P a r th e n o c issu s R hus r a d ic a n s S o la n u m V itis q u in q e fo lia (L .) P la n c h 28 4 9 L. d u lc a m a r a L . 5 2 4 2 1 L. S h r u b s(9 ) A r o n ia R e ic h e n b . 1 B e r b e r is th u n b e r g ii DC. 2 L o n ic e r a ta ta r ic a L. 2 5 P runus v ir g in ia n a L. 1 1 R ham nus c a t h a r t i c a Rhus v e r n ix L. 1 3 1 2 2 6 5 L. 2 Rubus a lle g h e n ie n s is Rubus o c c id e n ta lis P o rter 1 L. S am bu scu s c a n a d e n s is 2 3 L. 3 2 T r e e s (1 7 ) A cer p la ta n o id e s L. A cer rubrum L . A cer saccharum 3 4 M arsh 3 6 9 2 3 3 131 Table E (cont'd) R ed p in e S p e c ie s C arya o v a ta (M ill.) K. C e ltis o c c id e n ta lis L. C ornus flo r id a F r a x in u s Ju gIan s P in u s strob u s P in u s sy lv e str is 5 1 1 3 2 A ito n 5 L. se r o tin a Q uercus a lb a Q uercus rubra L. U lm u s 1 L. r e sin o sa S a ssa fra s Europ. la r c h 3 a m e r ic a n a L . n ig r a S co tch p in e K och L. P in u s Prunus R ed & w h ite p in e 11 2 L. 2 E hrh. L. a lb id u m a m e r ic a n a L . (N u tt.) N ees 2 2 4 1 3 2 3 10 1 APPENDIX F SPECIES OF UNDERSTORY VEGETATION 132 Table FI. Species of understory vegetation in red pine stands. R e la tiv e d e n sity R e la tiv e freq u en cy R e la tiv e coverage (%) (%) (%> 2 .8 5 .3 1 .8 19.6 5.3 43.1 5 .6 2 .6 0 .9 14.7 2.6 4.0 A ster 4 .9 2 .6 0 .9 D e sm o d iu m g l u t i n o s u m 4 .9 7 .9 12.0 G a liu m 1 .4 2 .6 0 .4 3 .5 2 .6 0 .9 1 .4 2 .6 0 .9 1 .4 2 .6 2 .7 12.6 5.3 2.2 S e n o c io 1 .4 2 .6 0 .4 S o lid a g o 2 .8 5 .3 0 .9 0 .7 2 .6 0 .4 A r o n ia m e la n o c a r p a 0 .7 2 .6 0 .9 B e r b e r is 1 .4 2 .6 1 .3 2 .1 2 .6 4 .0 S p e c ie s Ferns D r y o p te r is sp in u lo sa V in e s P a r th e n o c issu s q u in q u e fo lia Forbs A n te n n a r ia A sarum n e g le c ta c a n a d e n sis c ir c a e z a n s H ie r a c iu m L aspedeza repens P h y to ra cca a m e r ic a n a R um ex a c e t o s e l l a V e r o n ic a o ffic in a lis Shrubs th u n b e r g iii Rham nus c a t h a r t ic a 133 Table FI (cont'd) S p e c ie s R e la tiv e d e n sity R e la tiv e freq u en cy R e la tiv e coverage (%) (%) (%) 0 .7 2.6 1 .3 rubrum 2.8 5 .3 4 .4 C arya o v a ta 2.1 5 .3 3 .1 F r a x in u s 1 .4 2.6 1.8 Rubus a lle g h e n ie n s is T rees A cer a m e r ic a n a P in u s r e sin o sa 1 .4 2.6 0 .4 P in u s strob u s 3 .5 2.6 0 .4 Q uercus a lb a 1 .4 5 .3 2.2 Q uercus rubra 2.8 7 .9 5 .3 2.1 5 .3 3 .1 S a ssa fra s a lb id u m 134 Table F2. Species of understory vegetation in the mixed red and white pine stand. R e la tiv e d e n sity S p e c ie s R e la tiv e freq u en cy R e la tiv e coverage (%) (%) (%) 2 .5 2.94 0.74 1.25 2.94 0.74 5.0 2.94 1.47 1.25 2.94 0.74 A pocynum a n d r o sa e m ifo liu m 2.5 2.94 0.74 C ir c a e a 2.5 2.94 2.21 11.25 2.94 6.62 Sedges C arex p e n n sy lv a n ic a Ferns D r y o p te r is sp in u lo sa V in e s P a r th e n o c issu s S o la n u m q u in q u e fo lia d u lc a m e r a Forbs q u a d r isu lc a ta D e sm o d iu m g lu tin o su m G a liu m c o n cin n u m 1.25 2.94 0.74 G a liu m tr ifid u m 2.5 2.94 0.74 5.0 2.94 0.74 6.25 5.88 5.88 Phrym a le p to s ta c h y a 1.25 2.94 0.74 P h y to la c c a 3.75 5.88 8.09 2.5 2.94 0.74 P ren a n th es a lb a 2.5 "2.94 1.47 S m ila c in a 1.25 2.94 0.74 2.5 2.94 0.74 5.0 2.94 0.74 H ie r a c iu m O sm o r h iz a lo n g isty lis a m e r ic a n a (~ P l a n t a g o m a j o r racem osa S o lid a g o Taraxacum o ffic in a le 135 Table F2 (cont'd). R e la tiv e d e n sity R e la tiv e freq u en cy R e la tiv e coverage (%) (%) (%) 1.25 2.94 2.21 R ham nus c a t h a r t ic a 1.25 2.94 3.68 Rubus o c c id e n ta lis 3.75 2.94 5.15 Sam bu scu s 2 .5 2.94 8.09 A cer rubrum 3.75 2.94 7.35 A cer 2 .5 2.94 4.41 C arya o v a ta 1.25 2.94 3.68 J u g la n s n ig r a 1.25 2.94 3.68 13.75 5.88 3.68 2 .5 2.94 5.15 Q uercus a lb a 2 .5 2.94 4.41 Q uercus rubra 1.25 2.94 2.21 S a ssa fra s 2 .5 2.94 11.03 S p e c ie s Shrubs B e r b e r is th u n b e r g ii c a n a d e n sis T rees saccharum P in u s Prunus strob u s se r o tin a a lb id u m 136 Table F3. Species of understory vegetation in Scotch pine stands, S p e c ie s R e la tiv e d e n sity R e la tiv e freq u en cy (%) R e la tiv e coverage (%) V in e s R hus r a d ic a n s V itis 10.2 9.1 0.6 8 .2 9 .1 0 .4 Shrubs B e r b e r is th u n b e r g ii 4 .1 4.55 1.7 L o n ic e r a ta ta r ic a 4 .1 9 .1 2 .3 Prunus v ir g in ia n a 2 .0 4.55 1.3 Rham nus c a t h a r t i c a 12.2 9.1 17.3 12.2 9.1 7.9 6 .1 4.55 6.5 4 .1 9 .1 4 .0 10.2 9.1 18.6 T rees A cer rubrum A cer sacch aru m C arya o v a ta C ornus flo r id a F r a x in u s P in u s Prunus 2 .0 4.55 2.5 sy lv e str is 4 .1 4.55 0.2 se r o tin a 6 .1 4.55 15.7 9.1 21.1 S a ssa fra s a m e r ic a n a a lb id u m 14.3 137 Table F4. Species of understory vegetation in European larch stands. R e la tiv e d e n sity S p e c ie s R e la tiv e freq u en cy R e la tiv e coverage (%) (%) (%) 1 .1 1 .8 0 .1 1 .1 1 .8 0 .1 Ferns D r y o p te r is sp in u lo sa G rasses D a c ty r is g lo m era ta V in e s P a r th e n o c issu s q u in q u e fo lia 9 .9 6 .0 0 .9 Rhus r a d ic a n s 2 .2 4 .2 0 .2 V itis 2 .2 4 .2 0 .2 Forbs A r c tiu m m in u s 1 .1 1 .8 0 .1 C ir ca ea q u a d r isu lc a ta 1 .1 1 .8 0 .1 F r a g a r ia 1 .1 1 .8 0 .1 G a liu m 2 .2 1 .8 0 .1 co n c in n u m O sm o r h iz a lo n g isty lis 2 .2 1 .8 0 .2 S m ila c in a racem osa 4 .4 4 .2 0 .2 1 .1 1 .8 0 .1 g r a n d iflo r u m 1 .1 1 .8 0 .1 B e r b e r is th u n b e r g ii 2 .2 1 .8 0 .5 L o n ic e r a ta ta r ic a 5 .5 6 .0 6 .4 S o lid a g o T r illiu m Shrubs 138 Table F4 (cont'd) S p e c ie s R e la tiv e d e n sity R e la tiv e freq u en cy R e la tiv e coverage (%) (%) (%) Prunus v ir g in ia n a 1 .1 1 .8 0 .2 Rhus v e r n ix 2 .2 4 .2 0 .5 R ham nus c a t h a r t i c a 5 .5 1 .8 0 .2 Rubus a lle g h e n ie n s is 2 .2 4 .2 0 .9 Rubus o c c id e n ta lis 3 .3 6 .0 2 .1 A cer p la ta n o id e s 3 .3 1 .8 3 .5 A cer rubrum 9 .9 6 .0 16.3 A cer saccharum 3 .3 4 .2 6 .4 C arya o v a ta 3 .3 4 .2 5 .3 C e ltis 1 .1 1 .8 0 .2 F r a x in u s a m e r ic a n a 3 .3 4 .2 7 .9 P runus 8 .8 6 .0 17.2 1 .1 1 .8 0 .2 10.1 6.0 18.8 1 .1 1 .8 0 .4 T rees Q uercus o c c id e n ta lis se r o tin a rubra S a ssa fra s a lb id u m U lm u s a m e r ic a n a BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY Aird, P. L . , and E. L. Stone. 1955. Soil characteris­ tics and the growth of European and Japanese larch in New York. J. For. 53:425-429. Barnes, B. V. 1977. The international larch provenance test in Michigan, U.S.A. Silvae Genet. 26:145-148. Barrett, J. P., R. J. Alini, and K. T. McCarthy. 1976. Growth of white pine in New Hampshire. J. For. 74: 450-452. Beers, T. W. 1964. Composite hardwood volume tables. Ind. Agri. Exp. Stn. Res. Bull. No. 787, 12 pp. Beers, T. W . , and C. I. Miller. 1966. Horizontal point sampling tables. Ind. Agri. Exp. Stn. Res. Bull. No. 808. Benzie, J. W. 1977. Manager's handbook for red pine in the north central states. USDA For. Serv. Gen. Tech. Rep. NC-33, 22 pp. Berry, N. B. 1968. How plantation white spruce responds to crowning thinning. Can. For. Ind. 88:20-22. Brower, J. E . , and J. H. Zar. 1977. Field and Labora­ tory Methods for General Ecology. Wm. C. Brown Co. Dubuque, Iowa. 194 pp. Braekke, F. H . , and T. T. Kozlowski. 1975. Effect of climatic and edaphic factors on radial stem growth of Pinus resinosa and Betula papyrifera in northern Wisconsin" Advancing Frontiers of Plant Science 30:201-221. Buckman, R. E. Minnesota. 50 pp. 1962. Growth and yield of red pine in USDA For. Serv. Tech. Bull. 1272. Bushman, R. R. 1952. For. 50:628. European larch plantation. 139 J. 140 Cleve, K. van, and J. C. Zasada. 1976. Response of 70-year-old white spruce to thinning and fertiliza­ tion in interior Alaska. Can. J. For. Res. 6:145152. Coffman, M. S. 1976. Thinning highly productive red pine plantations. Mich. Tech. Univ. Ford For. Center Res. Note No. 18, 11 pp. Cook, D. B. 1939. European larch reproduces in eastern New York. J. For. 37:891-893. Cook, D. B. 1955. Coversion of weed hardwoods to coni­ fers in the Northeast. J. For. 53:650-654. Cook, D. B. 1969. Planted Larch in New York. Albany New York. 116 pp. D. Cook, Cook, D. B. 1974. Unexpected results from larch trials. J. For. 72:576-577. Cook, D. B. 1975. Conversion with larch--a dirt for­ ester's experience. J. For. 73:364-366. Cook, D. B . , R. H. Smith, and E. L. Stone. 1952. natural distribution of red pine in New York. Ecology 33:500-512. The Coorly, J. H. 1969. Initial thinning in red pine plan­ tations. USDA For. Serv. Res. Paper NC-35, 6 pp. Day, M. W. 1972. A 30-year thinning study in sprucefir. Mich. Agri. Exp. Stn. Res. Report No. 161. Day, M. W. 1980. Growth of Norway spruce in Upper Michigan. Mich. Agri. Exp. Stn. Res. Report No. 403. Day, M. W . , and V. J. Rudolph. 1962. Thinning planted red pine by the percent-of-height method: A progress report. Mich. Agri. Exp. Stn. Quart. Bull. 45:17-23. Day, M. W . , and V. J. Rudolph. 1966. Early growth re­ sults of thinning plantation red pine by three methods. Mich. Agri. Exp. Stn. Quart. Bull. 49: 183-188. Day, M. W . , and V. J. Rudolph. 1971. Thinning red pine by percent of height. Mich. Agri. Exp. Stn. Res. Report No. 125. 141 Day, M. W. , and V. J. Rudolph. 1972. Thinning plan­ tation red pine. Mich. Agri. Exp. Stn. Res. Report No. 151. Day, M. W. , and V. J. Rudolph. 1974. Thinning planted white-spruce--5 year results. Mich. Agri. Exp. Stn. Res. Report No. 242. DeHayes, D. H . , D. I. Dickmann, and W. A. Lemmien. 1980. Management of exotic timber trees in temperate regions of eastern North America: An assessment. For. Ecol. Management 3:31-44. DeMont, J. A., and E. L. Stone. 1968. Influence of soil and site on red pine plantations in New York. II. Soil type and physical properties. New York Agri. Exp. Stn. Bull. No. 1020. Dissemeyer, G. E. 1962. Thinning planted red pine by the percent-of-height method. Unpublished M.S. Thesis, Mich. St. Univ. Echols, R. M. 1958. Variation in tracheid length and wood density in geographic races of Scotch pine. Yale Univ. School For. Bull. No. 64, 52 pp. Eichmeier, A. H. 1963. Climate of Kalamazoo, Michigan. In Climate of Michigan by Stations. Mich. Weather Serv. F e m a l d , M. L. 1950. Gray's Manual of Botany. Nostrand Co., New York, 1632 pp. D. van Fisher, R. F., and E. L. Stone. 1968. Soil and plant moisture relations of red pine growing on shallow soil. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. Proc. 32:725-728. Fowells, H. A. 1965. Silvics of forest trees of the United States. USDA Agri. Handbook No. 271. Fowler, D. P., and J. F. Coles. 1980. Norway spruce provenance experiments in the maritimes region of Canada. For. Chron. 56:155-156. Fowler, D. P., and D. T. Lester. 1970. The genetics of red pine. USDA For. Serv. Res. Paper WO-8. Frank, R. M. 1973. The course of growth response in released white spruce--10 year results. USDA For. Serv. Res Paper NE-258. 142 Frank, R. M . , and J. C. Bjorkbom. 1973. A silvicul­ tural guide for spruce-fir in the Northeast. USDA For. Serv. Gen. Tech. Report NE-6, 29 pp. Goldsmith, L. J., and J. P. Barrett. 1973. Comparing boardfoot growth of white pine with loblolly pine. Northern loggers 22:30, 36. Graiser, R. N . , and R. W. Merz. 1953. Growth of planted red and white pine in Ohio and Indiana. Central States For. Exp. Stn. Tech. Paper No. 138. Grisez, T. J. 1968. Growth and development of older plantations in northeastern Pennsylvania. USDA For. Serv. Res. Paper NE-104. 40 pp. Hall, J. P. 1977. Comparison of the early growth of Larix and Picea in plantations in Newfoundland. B i­ monthly Res. Notes 33:13-14. Newfoundland For. Res. Center. Hannah, P. R. 1969. Stem wood production related to soils in Michigan red pine plantations. For. Sci. 15:320-326. Hawley, R. C. 1936. Observations on thinning and manage­ ment of eastern white pine (Pinus strobus L.) in southern New Hampshire. Yale Univ. School of For. Bull. No. 42, 16 pp. Hawley, R. C., and H. J. Lutz. 1943. Establishment, development, and management of conifer plantation in the Eli Whitney Forest, New Heaven, Conn. Yale Univ. School For. Bull. No. 53. Hicock, H. W. 1942. The Rainbow Forest plantations. Conn. Agri. Exp. Stn. Bull. No. 464:641-645. Hill, M. 0. 1979. The development of a flora in evenaged plantations. In The Ecology of Even-aged Forest Plantations (Ford, E 7 D . , D. C. Malcolm, and J. Atterson eds.). Proceedings of the Meeting of Division I, International Union of Forestry Research Organization. Homrich, S. R. 1980. Genetic effects on the growth rate and stem form of Scotch pine in Michigan. Unpublished M.S. Thesis. Mich. St. Univ. 143 Horton, K. W. , and G. H. Bedell. 1960. White and red pine ecology, silviculture and management. Can. Dep. North Affairs and Nat. Resources, For. Br. Bull. No. 124, 185 pp. Horton, K. W . , and W. G. E. Brown. 1960. Ecology of white and red pine in the Great Lakes--St. Lawrence Forest Region. Can. Dep. North Affairs and Nat. Resources, For. Br. Res. Div. Tech. Notes No. 88, 22 pp. Hosley, N. W. 1936. Norway spruce in the northeastern United States: A study of existing plantations Harvard Forest Bull. No. 19. Hughes, E. L . , and 0; L. Loucks. 1962. Rapid growth of Norway spruce and some native spruces in New Brunswick. Pulp and Paper Mag. Can. Woodlands Review 63:3-6. Hughes, E. L. 1970. Rapid growth of Norway spruce and red spruce near the Bay of Fundy. Pulp and Paper Mag. Can. Woodlands Review 71:58-60. Hunt, S. S. 1932. United States. European larch in the northeastern Harvard Forest Bull. No. 16, 45 pp. King, J. P., and P. 0. Rudolf. 1969. Development of white and Norway spruce trees from several seed .sources 29 years after planting. USDA For. Serv. Res. Note NC-70. Lemme, G. D . , and D. L. Mokma. 1980. Soil Classifica­ tion Manual. Dep. Crop and Soil Sci., Mich. St. Univ. Lemmien, W. A., and W. A. Botti. 1974. Scotch pine for timber production in northwest lower Michigan. Mich. Agri. Exp. Stn. Res. Report No. 230. Lemmien, W. A . , and V. J. Rudolph. 1964. Economic and silvicultural aspects of row and basal area thinning planted red pine. J. For. 62:721-723. Lemmien, W. A., V. J. Rudolph. 1968„ Growth of Euro­ pean larch in southern Michigan. Mich. Agri. Exp. Stn. Quart. Bull. 50:504-506. 144 Lemmien, W. A., V. J. Rudolph, and J. F, Marzec. 1968. Forest plantings on a wet site in Michigan. J. For. 67:186-188. Littlefield, E. W . , and E. J. Eliason. 1956. Report on an experimental plantation of several species of larch in New York. Silvae Genet. 5:166-169. Lundgren, A. L. 1981. The effect of initial number of trees per acre and thinning densities on timber yields from red pine plantations in the Lake States. USDA For. Serv. Res. Paper NC-193. MacGillvrary, H. G. 1969. Larches for reforestation and tree improvement in eastern Canada. For. Chron. 45:440-444. McComb, A. L. 1955. The European larch: site requirement and characteristics. 1:298-318. Mirov, N. T. 1967. The Genus Pinus. Co. New York. 602 pp. its races, For. Sci. The Ronald Press Morrow, R. R. 1974. Stem form and radial growth of red pine after thinning. Northern Logger 22:20-21, 44. Morrow, R. R. 1978. Growth of European larch at five spacing. New York's Food and Life Sci. Bull., Cornell Univ. Agri. Exp. Stn. No. 75. Nienstaedt, H. 1957. Silvical characteristics of white spruce (Picea glauca) . USDA For. Serv. Lake St. For. Exp. Stn. Paper No. 55, 23 pp. Nienstaedt, H. 1981. "Super" spruce seedlings continue superior growth for 18 years. USDA For. Serv. Res. Note NC-265, 4 pp. Nienstaedt, H., and A. Teich. 1971. The genetics of white spruce. USDA For. Serv. Res. Paper WO - 15, 24 pp. Ruby, J. L. 1964. The correspondence between genetic, morphological and climatic variation patterns in Scotch pine. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Mich. St. Univ. Rudolph, P. 0. 1950. Forest plantations in the Lake States. USDA For. Serv. Tech. Bull. 1010, 171 pp. 145 Rudolph, V. J. 1981. Personal Communications. Rudolph, V. J . , and W. A. Lemmien. 1955. Growth of a mixed red and white pine plantation in the Kellogg Forest. Mich. Agri. Exp. Stn. Quart. Bull. 37:412419. Rudolph, V. J., and W. A. Lemmien. 1959. Growth of dominant and codominant Scotch pine crop trees follow­ ing thinning. Mich. Agri. Exp. Stn. Quart. Bull. 41: 758-761. Rudolph, V. J., W. A. Lemmien, and M. W. Day. 1956. Growth of white pine in some pure and mixed plantings in Michigan. Mich. Agri. Exp. Stn. Quart. Bull. 38: 538-546. Sartz, R. S., and A. R. Harris. 1972. Growth and hydro­ logic influence of European larch and red pine 10 years after planting. USDA For. Serv. Res. Note NC144, 4 p. Silen, R. R . , and L. R. Woike. 1959. The Wind River arboretum. USDA For. Serv. PNW For. Range Exp. Stn. Res. Paper 33, 50 pp. Skog, R. E. 1951. Growth of mixed red and white pine plantations in the Upper Peninsula. Mich. Agri. Exp. Stn. Quart. Bull. 34:30-34. Sprackling, J. A., and R. A. Read. 1975. provenance study in eastern Nebraska. Serv. Res. Paper RM-144, 7 pp. Red pine USDA For. Stevenson, D. D . , and R. A. Bartoo. 1940. Coniferous forest plantings in central Pennsylvania. Penn. Agri. Exp. Stn. Bull. No. 394:4-6. Stiell, W. M. 1965. Five year growth of thinned white spruce plantations. Pulp and Paper Mag. Can. Wood­ lands Review 66:362-366. Stiell, W. M. 1978. Characteristics of eastern white pine and red pine. In White and Red Pine Symposium, D. A. Cameron (Com.), Can. For. Serv., Dep. Envir. Stiell, W. M. 1980. Response of white spruce plantation to three levels of thinning from below 1958-1978. For. Chron. 56:21-27. 146 Stone, D. M. 1976. Growth of red pine planted on a northern hardwood site. USDA For. Serv. Res. Note NC-210, 4 pp. Stone, D. M . , R. R. Morrow, and D. S. Welch. 1954. A malady of red pine on poorly drained sites. J. For. 52:104-114. Stone, D. M . , G. Taylor, N. Richards, and J. Dement. 1958. Soils and species adaptation: Red pine plantations in New York. In First North American Forest Soils Conference, Mich. St. Univ. Sweet, G. B. 1963. Significant height differences are shown in seven provenances of Pinus resinosa, six years after planting in New Zealand. New Zealand For. Serv. Res. Leafl. No. 3. Teich, A. H . , and M. J. Holst. 1973. Survival and growth of some exotic larch species and hybrids in the Ottawa Valley. For. Chron. 49:224-225. USDA. 1979. Soil Survey of Kalamazoo County, Michigan. USDA Soil Cons. Serv. 102 pp. Voss, E. G. 1972. Michigan Flora, Part I Gymnosperms and Monocots. Cranbrook Inst. Sci. and Univ. of Mich. Herb. Bull. No. 50, 488 pp. White, D. P. 1958. Available water: The key to forest site evaluation. In First North American Forest Soil Conference, Mich. St. Univ. Wilde, S. A., J. G. Iyer, C. Tanzer, W. L. Trautmann, and K. G.Watterson. 1965. Growth of Wisconsin coniferous plantations in relation to soils. Wiscon. Agri. Exp. Stn. Res. Bull. No. 262, 81 pp. Wilson, F. G. 1963. Fifty years from seed; The Star Lake plantation, Wiscon. Conserv. Dep. Tech. Bull. No. 27, 24 pp. Wilson, F. G. 1979. Thinning as orderly discipline: a graphic spacing schedule for red pine. J. For. 77: 483-486. Wilson, R. W . , Jr., and W. E. McQuilkin. 1963. Silvical characteristics of eastern white pine. USDA For. Serv. Res. Paper NE-13 29pp. 147 Wright, J. W. 1970. Genetics of eastern white pine. USDA For. Serv. Res. Paper WO-9, 16 pp. Wright, J. W. 1976. Introduction to Forest Genetics. Academic Press Inc., New York, 463 pp. Wright, J. W . , and H. I. Baldwin. 1957. The 1938 international Union Scotch pine provenance test in New Hampshire. Silvae Genet. 6:2-14. Wright, J. W . , and W. I. Bull. 1963. Geographic vari­ ation in Scotch pine, results of a 3-year Michigan study. Silvae Genet. 12:1-25. Wright, J. W . , W. A. Lemmien, J. N. Bright, M. W. Day, and R. L. Sajdak. 1976. Scotch pine varieties for Christmas tree and forest planting in Michigan. Mich. Agri. Exp. Stn. Res. Report No. 293, 15 pp. Wright, J. W . , Bright, M. spruce for Report No. H. Nienstaedt, W. A. Lemmien, J. N. W. Day, and R. L. Sajdak. 1977. Better Michigan. Mich. Agri. Exp. Stn. Res. 316, 8 pp. Wright, J. Wo, R. and C. Mohn. pine, 11-year Silvae Genet. A. Read, D. T. Lester, C. Merritt, 1972. Geographic variation in red data from the North Central States. 21:205-209.