|
Wildlife, Animals, and Plants
|
|
Introductory
SPECIES: Pinus taeda | Loblolly Pine
ABBREVIATION :
PINTAE
SYNONYMS :
NO-ENTRY
SCS PLANT CODE :
PITA
COMMON NAMES :
loblolly pine
old field pine
shortleaf pine
North Carolina pine
Arkansas pine
TAXONOMY :
The currently accepted scientific name of loblolly pine is Pinus taeda
L. [40]. There are no recognized subspecies, varieties, or forms.
Loblolly pine forms hybrids with shortleaf pine (P. echinata), longleaf
pine (P. palustris), pitch pine (P. rigida), slash pine (P. elliottii),
and pond pine (P. serotina) [3,40].
LIFE FORM :
Tree
FEDERAL LEGAL STATUS :
No special status
OTHER STATUS :
NO-ENTRY
COMPILED BY AND DATE :
Jennifer H. Carey, May 1992
LAST REVISED BY AND DATE :
NO-ENTRY
AUTHORSHIP AND CITATION :
Carey, Jennifer H. 1992. Pinus taeda. In: Remainder of Citation
DISTRIBUTION AND OCCURRENCE
SPECIES: Pinus taeda | Loblolly Pine
GENERAL DISTRIBUTION :
Loblolly pine is widely distributed in the southeastern United States
from southern New Jersey to central Florida and west through the Gulf
States to eastern Texas. It also occurs in southeastern Oklahoma,
central Arkansas, and southern Tennessee. It is found in the Piedmont
Plateau, the Atlantic Coastal Plain, the southern extent of the
Cumberland Plateau, and the Valley-and-Ridge Province of the Appalachian
Highlands [3,40].
ECOSYSTEMS :
FRES12 Longleaf - slash pine
FRES13 Loblolly - shortleaf pine
FRES14 Oak - pine
FRES15 Oak - hickory
FRES16 Oak - gum - cypress
STATES :
AL AR DE FL GA HI LA MD MS NJ
NC OK SC TN TX VA
ADMINISTRATIVE UNITS :
ASIS BITH CAHA CALO CHCH COLO
COSW CUIS FOCA FODO HOBE MANA
NATR OBRI RICH SHIL
BLM PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGIONS :
NO-ENTRY
KUCHLER PLANT ASSOCIATIONS :
K111 Oak - hickory - pine forest
K112 Southern mixed forest
K113 Southern floodplain forest
K114 Pocosin
SAF COVER TYPES :
46 Eastern redcedar
70 Longleaf pine
74 Cabbage palmetto
75 Shortleaf pine
79 Virginia pine
80 Loblolly pine - shortleaf pine
81 Loblolly pine
82 Loblolly pine - hardwood
83 Longleaf pine - slash pine
85 Slash pine - hardwood
87 Sweetgum - yellow-poplar
91 Swamp chestnut oak - cherrybark oak
98 Pond pine
104 Sweetbay - swamp tupelo - redbay
SRM (RANGELAND) COVER TYPES :
NO-ENTRY
HABITAT TYPES AND PLANT COMMUNITIES :
Published classifications listing loblolly pine as a dominant
species in community types are presented below.
Eastern deciduous forest, Vol. 1: Southeastern evergreen and
oak-pine region [58]
Plant communities of the Coastal Plain of North Carolina and their
successional relations [65]
The natural communities of South Carolina [67]
Common overstory associates of loblolly pine include southern red oak
(Quercus falcata), white oak (Q. alba), blackjack oak (Q. marilandica),
post oak (Q. stellata), water oak (Q. nigra), willow oak (Q. phellos),
laurel oak (Q. laurifolia), sassafras (Sassafras albidum), persimmon
(Diospyros virginiana), American beech (Fagus grandifolia), spruce pine
(Pinus glabra), blackgum (Nyssa sylvatica), red maple (Acer rubrum),
southern magnolia (Magnolia grandiflora), American elm (Ulmus
americana), water hickory (Carya aquatica) and white and Carolina ash
(Fraxinus americana and F. caroliniana) [3].
Common understory shrubs and trees include flowering dogwood (Cornus
florida), American holly (Ilex opaca), inkberry (I. glabra), yaupon (I.
vomitoria), hawthorn (Crataegus spp.), southern bayberry (Myrica
cerifera), pepperbush (Clethra spp.), and sumac (Rhus spp.) [3].
Common herbaceous species include bluestem (Andropogon spp.), panicum
(Panicum spp.), sedges (Carex spp. and Cyperus spp.), and fennel
(Eupatorium spp.) [3].
VALUE AND USE
SPECIES: Pinus taeda | Loblolly Pine
WOOD PRODUCTS VALUE :
Loblolly pine is the leading commercial timber species in the
southeastern United States [3,7]. Three-quarters of a million acres
(300,000 ha) are harvested each year for lumber and pulpwood [38]. Most
harvested pines are under 50 years old [7]. After 36 years, an
even-aged planted stand can yield 5,000 to 6,000 total cubic feet per
acre (350-415 cu m/ha) of merchantable timber [2].
IMPORTANCE TO LIVESTOCK AND WILDLIFE :
Loblolly pine seeds are an important food source for birds and small
mammals. More than 20 songbirds feed on loblolly pine seeds, and the
seeds make up more than half the diet of the red crossbill. Deer and
rabbit browse seedlings [59]. Loblolly pine stands provide cover and
habitat for white-tailed deer, northern bobwhite, wild turkey, and grey
and fox squirrels. Old-growth loblolly pine provides nesting habitat
for the endangered red-cockaded woodpecker [3].
PALATABILITY :
NO-ENTRY
NUTRITIONAL VALUE :
NO-ENTRY
COVER VALUE :
NO-ENTRY
VALUE FOR REHABILITATION OF DISTURBED SITES :
Because of its fast growth and good litter production, loblolly pine is
used for soil stabilization [3]. Loblolly can be planted in small
gullies and washes and in deeper washes if they are first stabilized
with vines [59].
Loblolly is adapted to a wide range of mine spoil sites. When used for
surface mine reclamation, it should not be planted above 2,500 feet (762
m) or in soil with a pH lower than 4.0. It does well when planted with
European alder (Alnus glutinosa) and with legumes. A loblolly pine X
pitch pine hybrid is used for mine reclamation in Kentucky and West
Virginia and grows faster than either parent [55]. Because surface mine
reclamation regulations require herbaceous cover, ground pads can be
used to reduce nearby competition in order to increase seedling growth
[18].
OTHER USES AND VALUES :
Loblolly pine is used for shade and as a wind and noise barrier [3].
MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS :
Loblolly pine is often grown in even-aged plantations. Natural
regeneration of even-aged stands can be accomplished using the seed
tree, shelterwood, or clearcut systems. Successful natural regeneration
depends on an adequate seed supply, a receptive seedbed, ample moisture,
and reduced competition. The seed tree system works well in the Coastal
Plain where loblolly seed crops are heavy and consistent [38]. Seed
tree silviculture requires 6 to 12 loblolly pine seed trees per acre
with a basal area of 6 square feet per acre (1.4 sq m/ha) [2]. Seed
trees should be 30 to 50 years old [59]. The shelterwood silviculture
system works well in the Piedmont where seed production is more erratic.
This system requires 20 to 40 seed trees per acre with a basal area of
25 to 40 square feet per acre (5.7-9.2 sq m/ha) [19]. Seed trees need
only be 30 years old in the shelterwood system [7]. Seed trees in both
systems should be harvested 3 to 5 years after successful regeneration
[19]. Cone production can be stimulated by releasing seed trees three
growing seasons before the seed is needed [3,38].
Seedbed preparation: Loblolly germinates best on exposed mineral soil.
Prescribed burning or mechanical scarification is used [3]. Seedling
growth and survival rates increase with increased site preparation [20,30].
Hardwood control: Control of competing hardwood and herbaceous species
is generally considered necessary for loblolly pine regeneration [3,19].
Herbicides, fire, and mechanical chopping are used to remove hardwoods
before loblolly pine regeneration. Once established, seedlings tolerate
some shade and will overtop competitors within 5 years if growth begins
at the same time [12,60]. Intensive understory control throughout the
life of the stand increases the growth and yield of loblolly pine.
Herbaceous control is more important than hardwood control for
increasing loblolly pine growth [12].
Insects: Loblolly pine is severely attacked by the southern pine beetle
(Dendroctonus frontalis). Infestations originate in stands stressed by
fire, drought, or logging. Other insects that damage loblolly pine
include pine engraver beetles (Ips spp.), pine tip moths (Rhyacionia
spp.), seedling debarking weevils (Hylobius spp. and Pachylobius spp.),
cone and seed feeders (Dioryctria spp. and Leptoglossus spp.), and
sawflies (Neodiprion spp.) [3,7,59].
Disease: Fusiform rust (Cronartium quercuum) is a stem disease that
infects seedlings and saplings. If the stem is girdled, the tree dies
[3,7]. Removing trees with severe stem galls minimizes timber losses
and improves stand quality [5]. The incidence of fusiform rust
increases with an increase in seedbed preparation [30]. Planted stands
have less fusiform rust incidence and associated mortality than do
naturally regenerated stands [46].
Root rot (Heterobasidion annosum) infects thinned stands. The fungus
colonizes on freshly cut stumps and then spreads by root to root contact
[51]. Thick litter is associated with sporophore development [25]. The
disease can be prevented by treating cut stumps with borax or with the
benign fungus, Peniphora gigantea [7].
Other fungal diseases include black root rot (Fusarium spp. and
Macrophomina spp.), which affects seedlings, and heart rot (Phellinus
pini and Phaeolus schweinitzii), which causes bole and butt rot in old
trees [3].
Weather: Loblolly pine is relatively windfirm where soils are deep, but
windthrow is common on shallow soils. Freezing temperatures cause
damage and seedling mortality, especially where southern seed sources
are used to establish northern stands [3,59].
Wildlife: The endangered red-cockaded woodpecker nests in living
loblolly pine with decayed heartwood. Trees older than 75 years are
most likely to develop the heart rot necessary for cavity excavation
[29]. Death of old-growth loblolly pine is primarily from the southern
pine beetle. To minimize cavity tree mortality, site disturbances such
as fire and logging should be limited where southern pine beetle
populations are high [16].
Pollution: Acid rain is suspected of causing an abnormal decrease in
growth of loblolly pine in the past 25 years in New Jersey [31].
However, loblolly pine does not appear affected by aluminum
concentrations of 1.5 millimoles per liter or less [48].
Other considerations: Kudzu vine (Pueraria lobata) will grow on,
engulf, and eventually smother even large loblolly pine [47]. Survival
and growth rates of loblolly pine seedlings decrease if grown with
broomsedge (Andropogon virginicus). Broomsedge may have an allelopathic
effect on loblolly pine [44].
BOTANICAL AND ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS
SPECIES: Pinus taeda | Loblolly Pine
GENERAL BOTANICAL CHARACTERISTICS :
Loblolly pine is a medium- to large-sized native, evergreen conifer with
platy bark and a long, straight, cylindrical bole. Cones have short,
stout, triangular spines. Loblolly pine grows rapidly, and is 90 to 110
feet (27-34 m) tall and 24 to 30 inches (61-76 cm) in diameter at
maturity. Loblolly pine is a medium-lived tree [3]. It grows a 4 to 5
foot (1.2-1.5 m) taproot in deep, sandy or loamy soil, but the taproot
is much shorter and stouter in clayey soil. In large trees, the lateral
root spread is often greater than the crown spread [59].
RAUNKIAER LIFE FORM :
Phanerophyte
REGENERATION PROCESSES :
Seed production and dissemination: Loblolly pine is monoecious. It
produces some cones by age 12 to 18, and begins producing cone crops
with high seed viability by age 25 [59]. Forty-year-old trees produce 3
to 5 times as many seeds as 25-year-old trees. Loblolly pine is a
prolific and consistent seed producer in the Coastal Plain and produces
large amounts of seed every 3 to 6 years in the Piedmont. Seed
viability ranges from 15 to 100 percent [3] and averages 60 percent
[59]. Cones contain an average of 45 seeds [19] but may contain
anywhere from 20 to 200 seeds [3]. In a good year, a mature tree
produces an average of 9,000 to 15,000 seeds [59]. Early summer drought
or freezing weather at flowering time results in low cone production
[38]. The winged seeds are dispersed 200 to 300 feet (61-91 m) by wind
[3].
Germination and seedling development: Seeds lay dormant on the forest
floor for 4 to 8 months. Germination is epigeal and is enhanced by bare
mineral soil. Germination takes place in March or early April [3]. No
viable ungerminated seeds carry over to the next growing season [4].
Adequate soil moisture is critical to the survival of newly germinated
seedlings [3,38]. Young open-grown loblolly pine grow 2 to 3 feet
(0.6-0.9 m) in height annually [13].
SITE CHARACTERISTICS :
Loblolly pine is predominantly found on Ultisols but can grow on a wide
variety of soils including Entisols, Spodosols, and Altisols. It grows
best on moderately acidic soil with imperfect to poor surface drainage,
thick medium-textured surface layers, and fine-textured subsoils.
Loblolly pine thrives in areas with 40 to 50 inches (1,020-1,270 mm) of
annual precipitation and 6 to 10 frostfree months. Low temperatures
limit its northern range and low rainfall limits its western range [59].
Loblolly pine grows on flat to mountainous terrain from 500 to 1,200
feet (150-365 m) in elevation [3].
SUCCESSIONAL STATUS :
Loblolly pine is moderately tolerant of shade when young but becomes
intolerant with age. It invades oldfields, clearcuts, and other
disturbed sites. Loblolly pine's rapid growth allows it to dominate a
site early [3]. In the absence of fire, loblolly pine is replaced by
climax hardwood forest. Where fire burns on average every 10 years,
loblolly pine is considered a fire subclimax [59]. It will supplant
longleaf pine (Pinus palustris) where fire frequency is reduced.
SEASONAL DEVELOPMENT :
Flowering is initiated in the summer, and staminate and pistillate buds
develop in the fall. Buds remain dormant until the following spring
when fertilization takes place. The time of pollen release is variable
and depends on springtime temperatures. Cones ripen in September and
October of the second season. Seed dispersal begins in October and
peaks in November. Eighty-five percent of the seeds fall by
mid-December [3,34,38,59].
FIRE ECOLOGY
SPECIES: Pinus taeda | Loblolly Pine
FIRE ECOLOGY OR ADAPTATIONS :
Loblolly pine is considered fire resistant [9,56]. Mature loblolly pine
survives low- to moderate-severity fires because of relatively thick bark
and tall crowns. Loblolly pine's fire resistance increases with bark
thickness and tree diameter. Young pines become resistant to
low-severity fire by age 10 [59]. Needles are low in resin and not
highly flammable [36]. Loblolly pine can endure some fire defoliation
[9]. It is not as fire resistant as longleaf pine (Pinus palustris) or
slash pine (P. elliottii) [28]. Abundant regeneration occurs on soil
exposed by fire [7]. Once loblolly pine is big enough to resist fire
damage, frequent summer fire will create and maintain a pine-grassland
community [63].
POSTFIRE REGENERATION STRATEGY :
Tree without adventitious-bud root crown
Crown residual colonizer (on-site, initial community)
Initial-offsite colonizer (off-site, initial community)
FIRE EFFECTS
SPECIES: Pinus taeda | Loblolly Pine
IMMEDIATE FIRE EFFECT ON PLANT :
Loblolly pines less than 5 feet (1.5 m) tall are usually killed by light
fire [37,59]. Saplings up to 2 inches (5 cm) in diameter are usually
killed by moderate-severity fire, and trees up to 4 inches (10 cm) in
diameter are usually killed by high-severity fire. Trees greater than 4
inches d.b.h. are rarely killed by moderate-severity fire [17].
Shade-grown saplings are susceptible to mortality from light fire
because of retarded bark and height growth [59]. In general, suppressed
small trees are more susceptible to fire damage and mortality than are
vigorous, large trees [1,39,45,54]. Summer fires kill more trees than
do winter fires [22].
Crown damage: Crown damage generally results in more fatality than
basal damage does [17,22,54,61]. Following a low-severity winter fire
in a 4-year-old stand that averaged 7.3 feet (2.2 m) in height,
mortality was low for seedlings that had less than 80 percent crown
scorch [61]. Older trees are not very susceptible to mortality from
crown scorch. Only a small percentage of severely crown-scorched trees
greater than 8 inches (20 cm) in d.b.h. were killed by a high-severity
hot spot in a prescribed summer fire in Virginia [1].
Mortality is greatly increased if needles burn. If there is 25 percent
or more needle consumption in loblolly pine younger than 9 years old ,
75 percent mortality can be expected [22]. If the buds are killed, the
tree will not recover [59]. Crown scorch is more serious in a summer
fire because there are no dormant vegetative buds [41].
Loblolly pine needles were killed instantly when immersed in water at
147 degrees Fahrenheit (64 deg C) but survived 13 minutes at 126 degrees
Fahrenheit (52 deg C) [10].
Roots are normally insulated by mineral soil, but if they are exposed
and burned, the tree can die [59]. Kayll [32] reported that heat
tolerance of seedling roots varied, but exposure to 129 degrees
Fahrenheit (54 deg C) for 5 minutes, 122 degrees F (50 deg C) for 30
minutes, or 118 degrees F (48 deg C) for 2 hours was generally lethal.
If a crown fire occurs, seeds inside cones can be destroyed. In one
study [59], only 16 percent of seeds were viable in top-killed trees
compared to 70 percent in uninjured trees.
DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF FIRE EFFECT :
A low-severity, slow-moving fire in thick litter can cause severe basal
scorch. Such a fire in east Texas burned deep depressions in the bark
of merchantable-sized loblolly pine. Ten percent of the stand died
directly from the fire or from insect infestation of fire wounds [24].
PLANT RESPONSE TO FIRE :
The growth of young loblolly pine can be reduced by fire damage.
Lightly scorched 4-year-old seedlings showed a slight loss in height
growth but no loss in diameter growth [61]. In another study [39],
19-year-old loblolly pine showed no growth loss when lightly scorched,
and only completely scorched trees continued to have growth loss 3 years
after the fire [39].
Loblolly pine seeds will germinate on soil exposed by fire [3].
If crown scorch occurs in the winter, foliage is usually replaced by
surviving dormant vegetative buds [41].
DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF PLANT RESPONSE :
Contrary to other findings, growth after a prescribed fire in Louisiana
was greater in trees with one-third or less crown scorch than in trees
with no crown scorch [54]. In effect, the fire pruned the lower
branches, which have low photosynthetic efficiency.
Loblolly pine growth may be more sensitive to the amount of soil
moisture available early in the growing season than it is to fire damage
[41].
FIRE MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS :
Prescribed fire is used in loblolly pine stands for seedbed preparation,
hardwood control, fuel reduction, and thinning. Unless thinning of
seedlings is desired, stands should not be burned before they are large
enough to withstand injury. To avoid crown scorch, loblolly pine should
be 10 to 15 years old, 15 to 20 feet (4.6-6.1 m) tall, and have a bark
thickness of 0.3 to 0.4 inch (0.8-1.0 cm) before being burned for the
first time [2,7,41,37,59,65]. To avoid mortality but not crown scorch,
trees smaller than 8 feet (2.4 m) tall or less than 2 inches (5 cm) in
diameter at groundline should not be burned [11]. The first fire is
difficult because of excess fuel build-up and danger to young pines. A
backfire should be used in cool weather and high moisture conditions.
Hardwood control: Hardwoods smaller than 4 inches (10 cm) in diameter
can usually be controlled by frequent fire [62]. Hardwood recovery
takes 5 to 10 years, depending on the site quality. Using prescribed
fire every 5 years or when 25 percent of the largest hardwood stems are
approaching 1 inch (2.5 cm) in diameter is recommended [41,42].
A single winter fire is effective at controlling 1-inch-diameter (2.5
cm) hardwoods [41]; periodic winter fires can control hardwoods up to 2
inches (5 cm) in diameter; and a summer fire can control hardwoods up to
4 inches (10 cm) in diameter [59]. Although prescribed burns are
usually conducted during winter to avoid injury to loblolly pine, summer
burning is a more effective control of hardwood competition [23].
Twenty years of annual summer burning completely eradicated hardwoods
from a loblolly pine forest in South Carolina [62,63]. However, a
series of annual winter fires will not eradicate hardwoods because root
stocks are not killed. Three annual summer fires at mid-rotation,
followed by periodic winter fires may be an effective means of hardwood
control [42]. Infrequent low-severity surface fires may speed up
succession to hardwoods by increasing the number of hardwood sprouts
[14].
Seedbed preparation: A low-severity summer prescribed fire,
approximately 1 month before seedfall, is the most effective seedbed
preparation [19,41,42,57]. If only a winter fire is used, hardwoods
have an entire growing season before loblolly pine seedfall [41,57]. A
winter fire 1 to 2 years prior to a summer fire is suggested to reduce
fuel buildup. A winter fire, followed by three annual summer fires just
before harvest, was very effective [52]. Brown and burn treatments have
also proven effective [6].
Thinning: Prescribed burning has been used successfully to thin young
loblolly pine stands. However, the forest manager risks damaging the
entire stand and reducing the growth rate. A prescribed fire in South
Carolina resulted in a 58 percent reduction in stems per acre and near 0
percent mortality in 1 inch (2.5 cm) diameter and larger saplings [61].
Thinning with fire should only be done in stands with a wide range of
diameters [45].
Disease and insects: In the Coastal Plain, prescribed burning before
and after thinning reduced infection by root rot (Heterobasidion
annosum). The fire destroyed litter which is associated with sporophore
development of H. annosum. A fungal competitor (Trichloderma spp.)
increased in the soil after burning and may have contributed to the
reduced infection [25].
Fire wounds 4 to 6 inches (10-15 cm) wide and larger can result in cull
from fungi, insect action, or high amounts of resin [26]. The black
turpentine beetle (Dendroctonus terebrans) attacked trees with fire
wounds in east Texas [24].
Nutrients: It is unclear whether prescribed fire on loblolly pine sites
will increase or decrease the available nitrogen. Fire volatilizes
nitrogen in the soil, and repeated burning on infertile sites may limit
productivity [33]. However, decomposition of burned material increases
the available nitrogen content of soil. Consequently, light prescribed
fire may be a low-cost alternative to fertilizer [50,64].
FIRE CASE STUDIES
SPECIES: Pinus taeda | Loblolly Pine
CASE NAME :
Hardwood control and seedbed preparation in Georgia
REFERENCE :
Brender, E. V.; Cooper, R. W. 1968 [8]
SEASON/SEVERITY CLASSIFICATION :
Summer strip head fire/low- to moderate-severity
Summer backfire/low-severity
Winter strip head fire/low- to moderate-severity
Winter backfire/low-severity
STUDY LOCATION :
The study was conducted in the Hitchiti Experimental Forest near Macon,
Georgia, in the rolling hills of the lower Piedmont.
PREFIRE VEGETATIVE COMMUNITY :
The overstory consisted of 100 square feet basal area per acre (23 sq
m/ha) of 40-year-old loblolly pine (Pinus taeda). Small understory
hardwoods included flowering dogwood (Cornus florida), sweetgum
(Liquidambar styraciflua), blackgum (Nyssa sylvatica), hawthorn
(Crataegus spp.), oak (Quercus spp.), hickory (Carya spp.), and winged
elm (Ulmus alata). There were 750 small hardwoods per acre (1,850/ha)
from 0.6 to 6.5 inches (1.5-16.5 cm) in diameter and approximately 5,000
smaller stems per acre (12,000/ha). Hardwoods made up 22 square feet
basal area per acre (5 sq m/ha).
TARGET SPECIES PHENOLOGICAL STATE :
NO-ENTRY
SITE DESCRIPTION :
The terrain was gently rolling with 10 to 20 percent slope. Litter
accumulation was 4 to 8 tons per acre (9-18 metric tons/ha) of which
approximately 10 to 45 percent was hardwood litter. The humus type was
shallow duff-mull.
FIRE DESCRIPTION :
Twenty plots of 1.5 acres (0.6 ha) each were randomly assigned to 5
different treatments: summer backfire, summer strip head fire, winter
backfire, winter strip head fire, and no fire. Backfires were run down
slope and head fires up slope. A complete stand inventory by species
and 1 inch (2.5 cm) diameter classes, a tally of stems less than 0.6
inches (1.5 cm) on 15 milacre quadrants, and litter fuel weights and
moisture were taken before and after the fire. The following
fire-weather measurements were taken: wind direction and speed, air
temperature, relative humidity, rate of flame spread, flame length,
depth of fire front, and time-temperature relationships at 1- and 4-foot
(0.3-1.2 m) heights. Soil erosion and seedling regeneration in milacre
quadrants were evaluated after the fire. Each plot was further
subdivided for repeat fires. The repeat fire data will not be discussed
here because of difficulties and inconsistencies encountered with the
fires.
The following tables present fire data:
fire rate of spread litter consumption energy release
ft/min percent Btu/min/ft
winter back 1.4 38 1232
summer back 1.2 46 1200
winter strip 8.8 40 8448
summer strip 10.0 53 11200
fire temperature duration
deg. C
winter strip-1 ft 255 24 seconds above 200 degrees
winter strip-4 ft 130 43 seconds above 100 degrees
summer strip-1 ft 480 22 seconds above 400 degrees
summer strip-4 ft 220 27 seconds above 200 degrees
FIRE EFFECTS ON TARGET SPECIES :
Summer fires top-killed more hardwoods than winter fires. The following
table shows the percentage of hardwoods top-killed by summer and winter
fires:
d.b.h. class summer kill winter kill
inches percent percent
1 96 73
2 64 73
3 33 12
4 18 7
5 15 8
6 13 0
There was no significant difference in percent hardwoods top-killed
between backfires and strip head fires.
Fuel consumption was greater in the summer than in the winter.
Seedlings were more abundant and better distributed on burned plots than
unburned plots. Seedlings were also more abundant on plots burned in
the summer than in the winter. The percent milacre stocking of
seedlings was 57 percent on the control, 77 percent on the winter fire
plots, and 90 percent on the summer fire plots.
Soil erosion was minimal, and no difference was found between season or
method of burning.
FIRE MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS :
A single strip fire in the summer is the best method for removing
hardwoods and preparing an adequate seedbed. Although there were no
significant differences between head strip fires and backfires, head
strip fires were cheaper and easier to control. A summer strip fire
should only be conducted, however, if fuel accumulation is less than 10
tons per acre (22 metric tons/ha). Optimum summer fire conditions were
a litter moisture content of 10 to 20 percent, a relative humidity of 20
to 60 percent, and a steady wind speed of 1 to 5 miles per hour (1.6-8
km/h).
REFERENCES
SPECIES: Pinus taeda | Loblolly Pine
REFERENCES :
1. Allen, Peter H. 1960. Scorch and mortality after a summer burn in
loblolly pine. Res. Note No. 144. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Southeastern Forest Experiment Station. 2
p. [12256]
2. Baker, James B. [n.d.]. Alternative silvicultural systems -- south. In:
Silvicultural challenges and opportunities in the 1990's: Proceedings of
the National Silvicultural Workshop; 1989 July 10-13; Petersburg, AK.
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Timber
Management: 51-60. [15024]
3. Baker, James B.; Langdon, O. Gordon. 1990. Pinus taeda L. loblolly
pine. In: Burns, Russell M.; Honkala, Barbara H., technical
coordinators. Silvics of North America. Volume 1. Conifers. Agric.
Handb. 654. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service: 497-512. [13410]
4. Barnett, James P.; McGilvray, John M. 1991. Carry-over of loblolly pine
seeds on cutover forest sites. Tree Planters' Notes. 42(4): 17-18.
[17653]
5. Belanger, Roger P.; Zarnoch, Stanley J. 1991. Evaluating and predicting
tree mortality associated with fusiform rust in merchantable slash and
loblolly pine plantations. In: Coleman, Sandra S.; Neary, Daniel G.,
compilers. Proceedings, 6th biennial southern silvicultural research
conference: Volume 1; 1990 October 30 - November 1; Memphis, TN. Gen.
Tech. Rep. SE-70. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service, Southeastern Forest Experiment Station: 289-298. [17483]
6. Bramlett, Dave L.; Jones, Earle P., Jr.; Wade, Dale D. 1991. Herbicide
and burn site preparation in the Georgia Piedmont. In: Coleman, Sandra
S.; Neary, Daniel G., compilers. Proceedings, 6th biennial southern
silvicultural research conference: Volume 1; 1990 October 30 - November
1; Memphis, TN. Gen. Tech. Rep. SE-70. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Southeastern Forest Experiment Station:
138-146. [17472]
7. Brender, Ernst V.; Belanger, Roger P.; Malac, Barry F. 1981. Loblolly
pine. In: Choices in silviculture for American forests. Washington, DC:
Society of American Foresters: 37-45. [6527]
8. Brender, Ernst V.; Cooper, Robert W. 1968. Prescribed burning in
Georgia's Piedmont loblolly pine stands. Journal of Forestry. 66(1):
31-36. [11000]
9. Brown, Arthur A.; Davis, Kenneth P. 1973. Forest fire control and use.
2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill. 686 p. [15993]
10. Byram, G. M.; Nelson, R. M. 1952. Lethal temperatures and fire injury.
Res. Note No. 1. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service,Southeastern Forest Experiment Station. 2 p. [16317]
11. Cain, Michael D. 1985. Prescribed winter burns can reduce the growth of
nine-year-old loblolly pines. Res. Note SO-312. New Orleans, LA: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Forest Experiment
Station. 4 p. [11580]
12. Cain, Michael D. 1991. Hardwoods on pine sites: competition or
antagonistic symbiosis. Forest Ecology and Management. 44: 147-160.
[16957]
13. Chapman, H. H. 1947. How to grow loblolly pine instead of inferior
hardwoods. In: Proceedings, 1947 Society of American Foresters annual
meeting; 1947 December 17-20; Minneapolis, MN. Washington, DC: Society
of American Foresters: 347-353. [11582]
14. Christensen, Norman L. 1981. Fire regimes in southeastern ecosystems.
In: Mooney, H. A.; Bonnicksen, T. M.; Christensen, N. L.; [and others],
technical coordinators. Fire regimes and ecosystem properties:
Proceedings of the conference; 1978 December 11-15; Honolulu, HI. Gen.
Tech. Rep. WO-26. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service: 112-136. [4391]
15. Christensen, Norman L. 1988. Vegetation of the southeastern Coastal
Plain. In: Barbour, Michael G.; Billings, William Dwight, eds. North
American terrestrial vegetation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press:
317-363. [17414]
16. Conner, Richard N.; Rudolph, D. Craig; Kulhavy, David L.; Snow, Ann E.
1991. Causes of mortality of red-cockaded woodpecker cavity trees.
Journal of Wildlife Management. 55(3): 531-537. [16319]
17. Cooper, Robert W.; Altobellis, Anthony T. 1969. Fire kill in young
loblolly pine. Fire Control Notes. 30(4): [Pages unknown]. [11584]
18. Davidson, Walter H. 1989. First-year evaluation of excelsior pads on
loblolly pine. In: Walker, D. G.; Powter, C. B.; Pole, M. W., compilers.
Reclamation, a global perspective: Proceedings of the conference; 1989
August 27-31; Calgary, AB. Edmonton, AB: Alberta Land Conservation and
Reclamation Council: 339-343. [14348]
19. Edwards, M. Boyd. 1987. Natural regeneration of loblolly pine. Gen.
Tech. Rep. SE-47. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service, Southeastern Forest Experiment Station. 17 p. [11590]
20. Edwards, M. Boyd; Shiver, Barry D. 1991. Evaluation of six
site-preparation treatments on growth and survival of loblolly pine in
the Georgia Piedmont. In: Coleman, Sandra S.; Neary, Daniel G.,
compilers. Proceedings, 6th biennial southern silvicultural research
conference: Volume 1; 1990 October 30 - November 1; Memphis, TN. Gen.
Tech. Rep. SE-70. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service, Southeastern Forest Experiment Station: 147-154. [17473]
21. Eyre, F. H., ed. 1980. Forest cover types of the United States and
Canada. Washington, DC: Society of American Foresters. 148 p. [905]
22. Ferguson, Edwin R. 1955. Fire-scorched trees - will they live or die?.
In: Modern forest fire management in the south: Proceedings, 4th annual
forestry symposium; 1955 April 6-7; Baton Rouge, LA. Baton Rouge, LA:
Louisiana State University, General Extension Division, School of
Forestry: 102-113. [11592]
23. Ferguson, E. R. 1957. Stem-kill and sprouting following prescribed fires
in a pine-hardwood stand in Texas. Journal of Forestry. 55: 426-429.
[13827]
24. Ferguson, E. R.; Gibbs, C. B.; Thatcher, R. C. 1960. "Cool" burns and
pine mortality. Fire Control Notes. 21(1): 27-29. [11776]
25. Froelich, R. C.; Hodges, C. S., Jr.; Sackett, S. S. 1978. Prescribed
burning reduces severity of annosus root rot in the South. Forest
Science. 24: 93-100. [8332]
26. Garren, Kenneth H. 1941. Fire wounds on loblolly pine and their relation
to decay and other cull. Journal of Forestry. 39: 16-22. [16314]
27. Garrison, George A.; Bjugstad, Ardell J.; Duncan, Don A.; [and others].
1977. Vegetation and environmental features of forest and range
ecosystems. Agric. Handb. 475. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service. 68 p. [998]
28. Hare, Robert C. 1965. Contribution of bark to fire resistance of
southern trees. Journal of Forestry. 63(4): 248-251. [9915]
29. Hooper, Robert G.; Lennartz, Michael R.; Muse, H. David. 1991. Heart rot
and cavity tree selection by red-cockaded woodpeckers. Journal of
Wildlife Management. 55(2): 323-327. [14965]
30. Hunt, Ron; Cleveland, Glenn. 1978. Cultural treatments affect growth,
volume, and survival of sweetgum, sycamore, and loblolly pine. Southern
Journal of Applied Forestry. 2(2): 55-59. [10633]
31. Johnson, A. H.; Siccama, T. G.; Wang, D.; [and others]. 1981. Recent
changes in patterns of tree growth rate in the New Jersey pinelands: a
possible effect of acid rain. Journal of Environmental Quality. 10(4):
427-430. [8633]
32. Kayll, A. J. 1968. Heat tolerance of tree seedlings. In: Proceedings,
annual Tall Timbers fire ecology conference; 1968 March 14-15;
Tallahassee, FL. No. 8. Tallahassee, FL: Tall Timbers Research Station:
89-105. [17849]
33. Kodama, H. E.; Van Lear, D. H. 1980. Prescribed burning and nutrient
cycling relationships in young loblolly pine plantations. Southern
Journal of Applied Forestry. 4(3): 118-121. [6344]
34. Krugman, Stanley L.; Jenkinson, James L. 1974. Pinaceae--pine family.
In: Schopmeyer, C. S., technical coordinator. Seeds of woody plants in
the United States. Agric. Handb. 450. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service: 598-637. [1380]
35. Kuchler, A. W. 1964. Manual to accompany the map of potential vegetation
of the conterminous United States. Special Publication No. 36. New York:
American Geographical Society. 77 p. [1384]
36. Landers, J. Larry. 1991. Disturbance influences on pine traits in the
southeastern United States. In: Proceedings, 17th Tall Timbers fire
ecology conference; 1989 May 18-21; Tallahassee, FL. Tallahassee, FL:
Tall Timbers Research Station: 61-95. [17601]
37. Langdon, O. Gordon. 1971. Effects of prescribed burning on timber
species in the Southeastern Coastal Plain. In: Prescribed burning
symposium: Proceedings; 1971 April 14-16; Charleston, SC. Asheville, NC:
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southeastern Forest
Experiment Station: 34-44. [10420]
38. Langdon, O. Gordon. 1979. Natural regeneration of loblolly pine. In:
Proceedings of the National siviculture workshop. Theme: The shelterwood
regeneration method; 1979 September 17-21; Charleston, SC. Washington,
D. C.: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Division of
Timber Management: 101-116. [11662]
39. Lilieholm, Robert J.; Hu, Shih-Chang. 1987. Effect of crown scorch on
mortality and diameter growth of 19-year-old loblolly pine. Southern
Journal of Applied Forestry. 11(4): 209-211. [11620]
40. Little, Elbert L., Jr. 1979. Checklist of United States trees (native
and naturalized). Agric. Handb. 541. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service. 375 p. [2952]
41. Lotti, Thomas. 1959. The use of fire in the management of Coastal Plain
loblolly pine. In: Proceedings, Society of American Foresters annual
meeting; 1959; San Francisco, CA. Bethesda, MD: Society of American
Foresters: 18-20. [11614]
42. Lotti, Thomas; Klawitter, Ralph A.; LeGrande, W. P. 1960. Prescribed
burning for understory control in loblolly pine stands of the coastal
plain. Station Pap. No. 116. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Southeastern Forest Experiment Station. 19
p. [15417]
43. Lyon, L. Jack; Stickney, Peter F. 1976. Early vegetal succession
following large northern Rocky Mountain wildfires. In: Proceedings, Tall
Timbers fire ecology conference and Intermountain Fire Research Council
fire and land management symposium; 1974 October 8-10; Missoula, MT. No.
14. Tallahassee, FL: Tall Timbers Research Station: 355-373. [1496]
44. McDonald, Philip M. 1986. Grasses in young conifer
plantations--hindrance and help. Northwest Science. 60(4): 271-278.
[3982]
45. McNab, W. Henry. 1977. An overcrowded loblolly pine stand thinned with
fire. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry. 1(1): 24-26. [10648]
46. McNab, W. Henry; Miller, Thomas; Brender, Ernst V. 1990. Growth and
fusiform rust responses of Piedmont loblolly pine after several site
preparation and regeneration methods. Southern Journal of Applied
Forestry. 14(1): 18-24. [11007]
47. Michael, J. L. 1986. Pine regeneration with simultaneous control of
kudzu. In: Proceedings, 39th Southern Weed Society: 282-288. [15901]
48. Raynal, D. J.; Joslin, J. D.; Thornton, F. C.; [and others]. 1990.
Sensitivity of tree seedling to aluminum: III. Red spruce and loblolly
pine. Journal of Environmental Quality. 19(2): 180-187. [11732]
49. Raunkiaer, C. 1934. The life forms of plants and statistical plant
geography. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 632 p. [2843]
50. Schoch, Peter; Binkley, Dan. 1986. Prescribed burning increases nitrogen
availability in a mature loblolly pine stand. Forest Ecology and
Management. 14: 13-22. [8676]
51. Stambaugh, William J. 1989. Annosus root disease in Europe and the
southeastern United States: occurrence, research, and historical
perspective. In: Otrosina, William J.; Scharpf, Robert F., technical
coordinators. Proceedings of the symposium on research and management of
annosus root disease (Heterobasidion annosum) in western North America;
1989 April 18-21; Monterey, CA. Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-116. Berkeley, CA:
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Forest
and Range Experiment Station: 3-9. [11337]
52. Trousdell, Kenneth B. 1970. Disking and prescribed burning: sixth-year
residual effects on loblolly pine and competing vegetation. Asheville,
NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southeastern Forest
Experiment Station. 6 p. [10190]
53. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1982.
National list of scientific plant names. Vol. 1. List of plant names.
SCS-TP-159. Washington, DC. 416 p. [11573]
54. Villarrubia, Charles R.; Chambers, Jim L. 1978. Fire: its effects on
growth and survival of loblolly pine, Pinus taeda L. Louisiana Academy
of Sciences. Baton Rouge, LA: Louisiana State University; 41: 85-93.
[13812]
55. Vogel, Willis G. 1981. A guide for revegetating coal minespoils in the
eastern United States. Gen. Tech. Rep. NE-68. Broomall, PA: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest
Experiment Station. 190 p. [15577]
56. Wade, Dale D. 1985. Survival in young loblolly pine plantations
following wildfire. In: Proceedings, 8th conference on fire and forest
meteorology; 1985 April 29 - May 2; Detroit, MI. Bethesda, MD: Society
of American Foresters: 52-57. [11599]
57. Wade, Dale; Edwards, M. Boyd; Weise, David R. 1991. Preharvest seedbed
preparation options to enhance loblolly pine regeneration. In: Coleman,
Sandra S.; Neary, Daniel G., compilers. Proceedings, 6th biennial
southern silvicultural research conference: Volume 1; 1990 October 30 -
November 1; Memphis, TN. Gen. Tech. Rep. SE-70. Asheville, NC: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southeastern Forest
Experiment Station: 171-185. [17476]
58. Waggoner, Gary S. 1975. Eastern deciduous forest, Vol. 1: Southeastern
evergreen and oak-pine region. Natural History Theme Studies No. 1, NPS
135. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park
Service. 206 p. [16103]
59. Wahlenberg, W. G. 1960. Loblolly pine, its use, ecology, regeneration,
protection, growth and management. Durham, NC: Duke University, School
of Forestry. 603 p. [17848]
60. Waldrop, Thomas A. 1991. Pine-hardwood regeneration in small openings
for uneven-aged management. In: Coleman, Sandra S.; Neary, Daniel G.,
compilers. Proceedings, 6th biennial southern silvicultural research
conference: Volume 1; 1990 October 30 - November 1; Memphis, TN. Gen.
Tech. Rep. SE-70.. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service, Southeastern Forest Experiment Station: 398-408. [17487]
61. Waldrop, Thomas A.; Lloyd, F. Thomas. 1988. Precommercial thinning a
sapling-sized loblolly pine stand with fire. Southern Journal of Applied
Forestry. 12(3): 203-207. [11595]
62. Waldrop, Thomas A.; Van Lear, David H.; Lloyd, F. Thomas; Harms, William
R. 1987. Long-term studies of prescribed burning in loblolly pine
forests of the Southeastern Coastal Plain. Gen. Tech. Rep. SE-45.
Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,
Southeastern Forest Experiment Station. 23 p. [11596]
63. Waldrop, Thomas A.; White, David L.; Jones, Steven M. 1992. Fire regimes
for pine-grassland communities in the southeastern United States. Forest
Ecology and Management. 47: 195-210. [17763]
64. Webb, Bobby G.; Messina, Michael G.; Guldin, James M. 1991. Effects of
prescribed burning and varying basal areas on nitrogen mineralization in
an east Texas pine forest. In: Coleman, Sandra S.; Neary, Daniel G.,
compilers. Proceedings, 6th biennial southern silvicultural x
research conference: Volume I.; 1990 October 30 - November 1; Memphis,
TN. Gen. Tech. Re. SE-70. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Forest Service, Southeastern Forest Experiment Station: 418-430.
[17491]
65. Wells, B. W. 1928. Plant communities of the Coastal Plain of North
Carolina and their successional relations. Ecology. 9(2): 230-242.
[9307]
66. Wright, Henry A.; Bailey, Arthur W. 1982. Fire ecology: United States
and southern Canada. New York: John Wiley & Sons. 501 p. [2620]
67. Nelson, John B. 1986. The natural communities of South Carolina.
Columbia, SC: South Carolina Wildlife & Marine Resources Department. 54
p. [15578]
Index
Related categories for Species: Pinus taeda
| Loblolly Pine
|
 |
