Tree species of concern in New Brunswick, Canada. I. Current status and threats

Forestry Chronicle

Volumn 83, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 393-401

  Loo, J A ^a,b   Beardmore, T L ^a,b   Simpson, J D ^a,b   McPhee, D A ^a,b  

^a LAURENTIAN FORESTRY CENTRE   (Canada)

^b New Brunswick Forest Gene Conservation Working Group   (United States)

Author keywords

American beech; Bur oak; Butternut; Criteria; Gene conservation; Genetic variability; Species status; Threats; Vulnerability; White elm

Indexed keywords

CONSERVATION; DISEASES; GENETIC ENGINEERING;

ENVIRONMENTAL THREATS; GENE CONSERVATION; GENETIC VARIABILITY; SPECIES STATUS;

FORESTRY;

CONSERVATION GENETICS; DECIDUOUS TREE; FUNGUS; GENETIC VARIATION; INVASIVE SPECIES; LAND USE; POPULATION DISTRIBUTION; SPECIES CONSERVATION; STAKEHOLDER; VULNERABILITY;

DISEASES; FAGUS GRANDIFOLIA; FOREST MANAGEMENT; INSECTS; JUGLANS; QUERCUS MACROCARPA; ULMUS AMERICANA; VULNERABILITY;

CANADA; NEW BRUNSWICK; NORTH AMERICA;

FAGUS; FAGUS GRANDIFOLIA; FUNGI; HEXAPODA; JUGLANS; JUGLANS CINEREA; QUERCUS MACROCARPA; ULMUS; ULMUS AMERICANA;

EID: 35548931932     PISSN: 00157546     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.5558/tfc83393-3     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Bey, C.F. 1990. American elm. In R.M. Burns and B.H. Honkala (tech. coords.). Silvics of North America: 2. Hardwoods. USDA, For. Serv., Agric, Handbook 654. 877 p.
2. Davis, C.N., D.T. Myren, and E.J. Czerwinski. 1992. First report of butternut canker in Ontario. Plant Disease 76: 972.
3. Environment Canada. 2005. Species at Risk (SARA) registry. Available at http://www.sararegistry.gc.ca/species/speciesDetails_e.cfm?sid=793
4. Fleguel, V.R. 1996. A literature review of butternut and the butternut canker. Eastern Ontario Model Forest Information Report.
5. Furnier, G.R., A.M. Stolz, R.M. Mustaphi and M.E. Ostry. 1999. Genetic evidence that butternut canker was recently introduced into North America. Canadian Journal of Botany 77: 783-785.
6. Griffin, J.M., G.M. Lovett, M.A. Arthur and K.C. Weathers. 2003. The distribution and severity of beech bark disease in the Catskill Mountains, N.Y. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 33: 1754-1760.
7. Harrison, K.J., J.E. Hurley and M.E. Ostry. 1998. First report of butternut canker caused by Sirococcus clavigignenti-juglandacearum in New Brunswick, Canada. Plant Disease 82: 1282.
8. Harrison, K.J., J.E. Hurley, A.W. MacKay and D.L. Sabine. 2005. Expansion of known distribution of butternut canker (Sirococcus clavigignenti-juglandacearum) in New Brunswick. 2004. Canadian Plant Disease Survey 85: 123-126.
9. Hinds, H.R. 1986. Flora of New Brunswick. Primrose Press, NB. 460 p. + maps and illust.
10. Hopkin, A., L. Innes and K.J. Harrison. 2001. Distribution of butternut canker (Sirococcus clavigignenti-juglandacearum) in eastern Canada. Canadian Plant Disease Survey 81: 154-157.
11. Houston, D.B. and D.R. Houston. 1994. Variation in American beech (Fagus grandifolia Ehrh.): isozyme analysis of genetic structure in selected stands. Silvae Genetica 43: 277-284.
12. Houston, D.B. and D.R. Houston. 2000. Allozyme genetic diversity among Fagus grandifolia trees resistant or susceptible to beech bark disease in natural populations. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 30: 778-789.
13. Houston, D.R. 1975. Beech bark disease: the aftermath forests are structured for a new outbreak. Journal of Forestry 73: 660-663.
14. Houston, D.R. 1982. A technique to artificially infest beech bark with the beech scale. pp. 2-8. USDA Forest Service Report Paper # 507.
15. Houston, D.R. 1983. American beech resistance to Cryptococcus fagisuga In Proceedings, IUFRO Beech Bark Disease Working Party Conference, 26 Sept.-8 Oct. 1982.,Hamden, Conn. USDA For. Serv. Gen. Tech. Rep. WO-37.
16. Houston, D.R., E.J. Parker and D. Lonsdale. 1979. Beech bark disease: patterns of spread and development of the initiating agent Cryptococcus fagisuga. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 9: 336-344.
17. Innes, L. 1998. Sirococcus clavigignenti-juglandacearum on butternut and black walnut fruit. In Proceedings of IUFRO Working Party 7.02.02 Meeting, 25-31 May 1997, Quebec City, Quebec. pp. 129-132. Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service - Laurentian Forestry Centre Information Report LAU-X-122. 272 p.
18. Innes, L. and A. Rainville. 1996. Distribution and detection of Sirococcus clavigignenti-juglandacearum in Quebec. Phytoprotection 77: 75-78.
19. Kitamura, K., K. Homma, H. Takasu, S. Hagiwara, F.H. Utech, D.F. Whigham and S. Kawano. 2001. Demographic genetics of the American beech, Fagus grandifolia. II. Genetic substructure of populations for the Blue Ridge, Piedmont and the Great Smoky Mountains. Plant Species Biology 16: 219-230.
20. Kitamura, K. and S. Kawano. 2001. Regional differentiation in genetic components for the American beech, Fagus grandifolia Ehrh., in relation to geological history and mode of reproduction. Journal of Plant Research 114: 353-368.
21. Kitamura, K., H. Takasu, K. Hayashi, M. Ohara, T. Ohkawa, F.H. Utech and S. Kawano. 2000. Demographic genetic analyses of the American beech (Fagus grandifolia Ehrh.) I. Genetic substructurings of northern populations with root suckers in Quebec and Pennsylvania. Plant Species Biology 15: 43-58.
22. Koch, J.L. and D.W. Carey. 2004. Controlled cross-pollinations with American beech trees that are resistant to beech bark disease. In D.A. Yaussy, D.M. Hix, R.P. Long and P.C. Goebel (eds.). Proceedings, 14th Central Hardwood Forest Conference, 16-19 March 2004, Wooster, OH. pp. 358-364. Gen. Tech. Rep. NE-316. USDA Forest Service, Northeastern Research Station, Newtown Square, PA.
23. Ledig, F.T. 1992. Human impacts on genetic diversity in forest ecosystems. Oikos 63: 87-108.
24. Loo, J.A., T.L. Beardmore, J.D. Simpson and D. McPhee. 2003. Developing gene conservation strategies for tree and shrub species. In Proc. Of the XII World Forestry Congress, Vol. B, Forests for the Planet, 21-28 September 2003, Quebec, QC, Canada. pp. 221-222. Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service, Quebec, QC.
25. Loo, J. and N. Ives. 2003. The Acadian forest: historical condition and human impacts. The Forestry Chronicle 79: 462-474.
26. Lutz, S. 1997. Pre-European settlement and present forest composition in King's County, New Brunswick. MF Thesis, University of New Brunswick, Fredericton, NB.
27. Magasi, L.P., D.A. Urquhart, K.J. Harrison and D.M. Murray. 1993. Three decades of Dutch elm disease in Fredericton, N.B.: 1961-1990. Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service - Atlantic Forestry Centre Information Report M-X-185E. 39 p.
28. McPhee, D. 2001. Status description for bur oak, Quercus macrocarpa, in the province of New Brunswick. MScF Thesis,University of New Brunswick, Fredericton, NB.
29. Morin, R., J. Beaulieu, M. Delauriers, M. Caoust and J. Bousquet. 2000. Low genetic diversity at allozyme loci in Juglans cinerea. Canadian Journal of Botany 78: 1238-1243.
30. Nair, V.M.G., C.J., Kostichka and J.E. Kuntz. 1979. Sirococcus clavigignenti-juglandacearum: an undescribed species causing canker on butternut. Mycologia 71: 641-646.
31. New Brunswick Department of Natural Resources and Energy (NBDNRE). 2003. General status of wildlife in New Brunswick: draft vascular plant status. NBDNRE, Fredericton, NB. (April 4, 2003.).
32. Ostry, M.E. 1995. Conservation of butternut in the eastern forests. USDA Forest Service. In Forest gene Conservation Principles to Practice-Workshop Proceedings. Ottawa, ON.
33. Ostry, M.E. 1997. Butternut canker: history, biology, impact and resistance. In Knowledge for the future of black walnut. Proceedings of the fifth black walnut symposium, 1996. USDA North Central Forest Experimental Station. 10 p.
34. Ostry, M.E. 1998. Butternut canker in North America 1967-1997. In Proceedings IUFRO WP foliage, shoot and stem diseases in forest trees. Quebec City, QC. 8 p.
35. Ostry, M.E. and S. Kastovich. 1997. First report of Sirococcus clavigignenti-juglandacearum on black walnut. Plant Disease 81: 830.
36. Ostry, M.E., M.E. Mielke and D.D. Skilling. 1994. Butternut-strategies for managing a threatened tree. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report NC-165. 7 p.
37. Ostry, M.E. and P.M. Pijut. 2000. Butternut: an underused resource in North America. HortTechnology 10: 302-306.
38. Perley, M. 1847. Report on the forest trees of New Brunswick. Simmonds'Colonial Magazine XI (41): 129-155, 314-324, 412-428.
39. Powell, G. and T. Beardmore. 2002. New Brunswick tree and shrub species of concern: a field guide. Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service- Atlantic Forestry Centre, Information Report M-X-212E. 66 p.
40. Ramirez, M., J.A. Loo and M. Krasowski. 2007. Evaluation of genetic resistance to the beech scale insect (Cryptococcus fagisuga) and propagation of American beech (Fagus grandifolia) by grafting. Silvae Genetica (In press).
41. Renlund, D.W. 1971. Forest pest condition in Wisconsin. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources Ann. Rep. pp. 1-53.
42. Shigo, A.L. 1972. The beech bark disease today in the northeastern United States. Journal of Forestry 70(5): 286-289.
43. Tubbs, C.H., and D.R. Houston. 1990. Fagus grandifolia Ehrh. American beech. In R.M. Burns and B.H. Honkala (tech. coords.). Silvics of North America Volume 2. Hardwoods. pp. 325-332. USDA Forest Service Agriculture Handbook 654. Washington, DC.
44. USDA Forest Service. 1979. Butternut dieback. In Guide to Common Insects and Diseases of Forest Trees. The Northeastern United States Forest Insect and Disease Management, Northeastern Area State and Private Forests. Broomall, PA.