An examination of the genetic control of Douglas-fir vascular tissue phytochemicals: Implications for black bear foraging

Forest Ecology and Management

Volumn 123, Issue 2-3, 1999, Pages 245-251

  Kimball, Bruce A ^a   Johnson, G R ^b   Nolte, Dale L ^a   Griffin, Doreen L ^a  

^a NATIONAL WILDLIFE RESEARCH CENTER   (United States)

^b USDA FOREST SERVICE   (United States)

Author keywords

Forest management; Pseudotsuga menziesii; Sugars; Terpenoids; Tree genetics; Ursus americanus

Indexed keywords

ECOLOGY; GAS CHROMATOGRAPHY; SUGARS;

DOUGLAS-FIR VASCULAR TISSUE;

FORESTRY;

HERBIVORY; PHYTOCHEMISTRY;

PSEUDOTSUGA MENZIESII; URSUS AMERICANUS;

EID: 0033536945     PISSN: 03781127     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0378-1127(99)00042-0     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Bell C.M., Harestad A.S. Efficacy of pine oil as repellent to wildlife. J. Chem. Ecol. 13:1987;1409-1417.
2. Berenbaum M. The chemistry of defense: theory and practice. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA. 92:1995;2-8.
3. Bryant J.P., Provenza F.D., Pastor J., Reichardt P.B., Clausen T.P., du Toit J.T. Interactions between woody plants and browsing mammals mediated by secondary metabolites. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 22:1991;431-446.
4. Bryant J.P., Reichardt P.B., Clausen T.P. Chemically mediated interactions between woody plants and browsing mammals. J. Range Manage. 45:1992;18-24.
5. Coley P.D., Bryant J.P., Chapin III F.S. Resource availability and plant antiherbivore defense. Science. 230:1985;895-899.
6. Dimock E.J., Silen R.R., Allen V.E. Genetic resistance in Douglas-fir damage by snowshoe hare and black-tailed deer. For. Sci. 22:1976;106-121.
7. Farentinos R.C., Capretta P.J., Kepner R.E., Littlefield V.M. Selective herbivory in tassel-eared squirrels: role of monoterpenes in ponderosa pines chosen as feeding trees. Science. 213:1981;1273-1275.
8. Fisher, D.S., Burns, J.C., Mayland, H.F., 1997a. Variation in preference for morning or afternoon harvested hay in sheep, goats, and cattle. J. Anim. Sci. 75 (Suppl.), pp. 201.
9. Fisher, D.S., Mayland, H.F., Burns, J.C., 1997b. Diurnal timing of hay harvest and ruminant preferences for hays. Agron. Abs. p. 142.
10. Gershenzon J. Metabolic costs of terpenoid accumulation in higher plants. J. Chem. Ecol. 20:1994;1291-1328.
11. Harman, H.H., 1976. Modern Factor Analysis, third edn. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
12. Herms D.A., Mattson W.J. The dilemma of plants: to grow or defend. Quart. Rev. Biol. 67:1992;283-335.
13. Kanaskie, A., Chetock, J., Irwin, G., Overhulser, D., 1990. Black bear damage to forest trees in Northwest Oregon 1988-1989. Oregon Department of Forestry, Pest Management Report 90-1, pp. 1-37.
14. Kimball B.A., Craver R.K., Johnston J.J., Nolte D.L. Quantitative analysis of the mono- and sesquiterpenoids of Douglas-fir vascular tissue by solvent extraction and gas chromatography with mass selective detection. J. High Resol. Chromatogr. 18:1995;221-225.
15. Kimball, B.A., Nolte, D.L., Engeman, R.M., Johnston, J.J., Stermitz, F.R., 1998a. Chemically mediated foraging preference of black bears (Ursus americanus). J. Mammal. 79, pp. 448-456.
16. Kimball, B.A., Nolte, D.L., Griffin, D.L., Dutton, S.M., Ferguson, S., 1998b. Impacts of live canopy pruning on the chemical constituents of Douglas-fir vascular tissues: Implications for black bear tree selection. For. Ecol. Manage. 109, pp. 51-56.
17. Kimball, B.A., Turnblom, E.C., Nolte, D.L., Griffin, D.L., Engeman, R.M., 1998c. Effects of thinning and nitrogen fertilization on sugars and terpenes in Douglas-fir vascular tissues: Implications for black bear foraging. For. Sci. 44, pp. 599-602.
18. King J.N., Carson M.J., Johnson G.R. Analysis of disconnected diallel mating designs II - results from a third generation progeny test of the New Zealand radiata pine improvement programme. Silvae Genet. 47:1998;80-87.
19. Kossuth S.V., McCall E., Ledbetter J. Clone certification by use of cortical monoterpenes as biochemical markers. Silvae Genetica. 37:1988;73-76.
20. Mason A.C., Adams D.L. Black bear damage to thinned timber stands in Northwest Montana. West J. Appl. For. 4:1989;10-13.
21. Nelson E.E. Black bears prefer urea-fertilized trees. West. J. Appl. For. 4:1989;13-15.
22. Provenza F.D., Scott C.B., Phy T.S., Lynch J.J. Preference of sheep for foods varying in flavors and nutrients. J. Anim. Sci. 74:1996;2355-2361.
23. Radwan M.A. Chemical composition of the vascular tissue of four tree species in relation to feeding by the black bear. For. Sci. 15:1969;11-16.
24. Radwan M.A., Ellis W.D. Clonal variation in monoterpene hydrocarbons of vapors of Douglas-fir foliage. For. Sci. 21:1975;63-67.
25. Reichardt P.B., Bryant J.P., Mattes B.R., Clausen T.P., Chapin III F.S., Meyer M. Winter chemical defenses of Alaskan balsam poplar against snowshoe hares. J. Chem. Ecol. 16:1990;1941-1959.
26. SAS, 1997. SAS/STAT Software: Changes and enhancements through release 6.12, SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC. p. 1167.
27. Schaefer P.R., Hanover J.W. Taxonomic implications of monoterpene compounds of blue and Engelmann spruces. For. Sci. 32:1986;725-734.
28. Schmidt, W.C., Gourley, M., 1992. Black bear. pp. 309-331. In: Black, H.C. (Ed.), Silvicultural approaches to animal damage management in pacific northwest forests. United States Department of Agriculture Technical Report, PNW-GTR-287, pp. 1-422.
29. Schmidt, W.C., Gourley, M., 1992. Black bear. pp. 309-331. In: Black, H.C. (Ed.), Silvicultural approaches to animal damage management in pacific northwest forests. United States Department of Agriculture Technical Report, PNW-GTR-287, pp. 1-422.
30. Villalba J.J., Provenza F.D. Preference for wheat straw by lambs conditioned with intraruminal infusions of starch. British J. Nutr. 77:1997;287-297.
31. Wang J., Provenza F.D. Dynamics of preference by sheep offered foods varying in flavors, nutrients, and a toxin. J. Chem. Ecol. 23:1997;275-288.
32. White E.E. Biosynthetic implications of terpene correlations in Pinus contorta. Phytochem. 22:1983;1399-1405.
33. Woods J.H., Kolotelo D., Yanchuk A.D. Early selection of Coastal Douglas-fir in a farm-field test environment. Silvae Genetica. 44:1995;178-186.