Growth, yield, and structure of extended rotation Pinus resinosa stands in Minnesota, USA

Canadian Journal of Forest Research

Volumn 40, Issue 5, 2010, Pages 1000-1010

  D'Amato, Anthony W ^a   Palik, Brian J ^b   Kern, Christel C ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

^b U S DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANNUAL VOLUMES; BASAL AREA; DIAMETER-AT-BREAST HEIGHTS; ECOLOGICAL OBJECTIVES; FOREST LAND; FOREST STRUCTURE; GROWING STOCKS; GROWTH AND YIELD; GROWTH RESPONSE; LONG-TERM GROWTH RESPONSE; MINNESOTA; MINNESOTA , USA; PINUS RESINOSA; THINNINGS; VOLUME GROWTH; VOLUME PRODUCTION;

CONSERVATION; ROTATION;

FORESTRY;

BASAL AREA; CONIFEROUS FOREST; ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION; FORESTRY PRODUCTION; GROWTH RATE; GROWTH RESPONSE; HARVESTING; STAND STRUCTURE; SUCCESSION; THINNING; YIELD RESPONSE;

COMPETITION; FORESTRY; FORESTS; GROWTH; PINUS RESINOSA; YIELD;

MINNESOTA; UNITED STATES;

PINUS RESINOSA;

EID: 77951979483     PISSN: 00455067     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1139/X10-041     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Assman, E. 1970. The principles of forest yield study. Pergamon Press, Oxford, UK.
2. Bauhus, J., Puettmann, K., and Messier, C. 2009. Silviculture for old-growth attributes. For. Ecol. Manage. 258(4): 525-537. doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2009.01.053.
3. Bebber, D.P., Thomas, S.C., Cole, W.G., and Balsillie, D. 2004. Diameter increment in mature eastern white pine Pinus strobes L. following partial harvest of old-growth stands in Ontario, Canada. Trees (Berl.), 18(1): 29-34.
4. Benzie, J.W. 1977. Manager's handbook for red pine in the North Central States. USDA For. Serv. Gen. Tech. Rep. NC-33.
5. Bettinger, P., Boston, K., Siry, J.P., and Grebner, D.L. 2009. Forest management and planning. Academic Press/Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
6. Bradford, J.B., and Palik, B.J. 2009. A comparison of thinning methods in red pine: consequences for stand-level growth and tree diameter. Can. J. For. Res. 39(3): 489-496. doi:10.1139/X08-201.
7. Brown, R.M., and Gevorkiantz, S.R. 1934. Volume, yield, and stand tables for tree species in the Lake States. Univ. Minn. Agric. Exp. Stn. Tech. Bull. 39.
8. Buckman, R.E. 1962. Three growing-stock density experiments in Minnesota red pine: a progress report. USDA, Forest Service, Lake States Experiment Station.
9. Buckman, R.E. 2006. Growth and yield of red pine in the Lake States. USDA For. Serv. Gen. Tech. Rep. NC-271.
10. Burgess, D., and Robinson, C. 1998. Canada's oldest permanent sample plots-thinning in white and red pine. For. Chron. 74(4): 606-616.
11. Curtis, R.O. 1995. Extended rotations and culmination age of coast Douglas-fir: old studies speak to current issues. USDA For. Serv. Res. Pap. PNW 485.
12. Curtis, R.O. 1997. The role of extended rotations. In Creating a forestry for the 21st century. Edited by K.A. Kohm and J.F. Franklin. Island Press, Washington, D.C. pp. 165-170.
13. Curtis, R.O., and Carey, A.B. 1996. Timber supply in the Pacific Northwest: managing for economic and ecological values in Douglas-fir forests. J. For. 94(9): 4-7, 35-37.
14. Curtis, R.O., and Marshall, D.D. 1993. Douglas-fir rotations -Time for reappraisal? West. J. Appl. For. 8(3): 81-85.
15. Curtis, R.O., Marshall, D.D., and Bell, J.F. 1997. LOGS: a pioneering example of silvicultural research in coast Douglas-fir. J. For. 95(7): 19-25.
16. Davis, L.S., Johnson, K.N., Bettinger, P., and Howard, T.E. 2001. Forest management: to sustain ecological, economic, and social values. Waveland Press, Inc., Long Grove, Ill., USA.
17. Day, R.J., and Carter, J.V. 1990. Stand structure and successional development of the white and red pine communities in the Temagami Forest. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Northeastern Region, Ottawa, Ont.
18. Duvall, M.D., and Grigal, D.F. 1999. Effects of timber harvesting on coarse woody debris in red pine forests across the Great Lakes states, USA. Can. J. For. Res. 29(12): 1926-1934. doi:10.1139/cjfr-29-12-1926.
19. Fajardo, A., Graham, J.M., Goodburn, J.M., and Fiedler, C.E. 2007. Ten-year responses of ponderosa pine growth, vigor, and recruitment to restoration treatments in the Bitterroot Mountains, Montana, USA. For. Ecol. Manage. 243(1): 50-60. doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2007.02.006.
20. Franklin, J.F., Mitchell, R.J., and Palik, B. 2007. Natural disturbance and stand development principles for ecological forestry. USDA For. Serv. Gen. Tech. Rep. NRS-19.
21. Frelich, L.E., and Reich, P.B. 1995. Spatial patterns and succession in a Minnesota southern-boreal forest. Ecol. Monogr. 65(3): 325-346. doi:10.2307/2937063.
22. Gilmore, D.W., and Palik, B. 2006. A revised manager's handbook for red pine in the north central region. USDA For. Res. Gen. Tech. Rep. NC-264.
23. Gilmore, D.W., O'Brien, T.C., and Hoganson, H.M. 2005. Thinning red pine plantations and the Langsaeter hypothesis: a northern Minnesota case study. North. J. Appl. For. 22(1): 19-26.
24. Harmon, M.E., and Marks, B. 2002. Effects of silvicultural practices on carbon stores in Douglas-fir - western hemlock forests in the Pacific Northwest, U.S.A.: results from a simulation model. Can. J. For. Res. 32(5): 863-877. doi:10.1139/X01-216.
25. Harvey, B.D., Leduc, A., Gauthier, S., and Bergeron, Y. 2002. Stand-landscape integration in natural disturbance-based management of the southern boreal forest. For. Ecol. Manage. 155(1-3): 369-385. doi:10.1016/S0378-1127(01)00573-4.
26. Kolb, T.E., Agee, J.K., Fule, P.Z., McDowell, N.G., Pearson, K., Sala, A., and Waring, R.H. 2007. Perpetuating old ponderosa pine. For. Ecol. Manage. 249(3): 141-157. doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2007.06.002.
27. Latham, P., and Tappeiner, J. 2002. Response of old-growth conifers to reduction in stand density in western Oregon forests. Tree Physiol. 22(2-3): 137-146. PMID:11830410.
28. Lilja, S., De Chantal, M., Kuuluvainen, T., Vanha-Majamaa, I., and Puttonen, P. 2005. Restoring natural characteristics in managed Norway spruce [Picea abies (L.) Karst.] stands with partial cutting, dead wood creation and fire: immediate treatment effects. Scand. J. For. Res. 20(5): 68-78. doi:10.1080/14004080510040977.
29. Lindenmayer, D., and Franklin, J.F. 2002. Conserving forest biodiversity: a comprehensive multiscaled approach. Island Press, Washington, D.C., USA.
30. McArdle, R.E., Meyer, M.H., and Bruce, D. 1949. The yield of Douglas-fir in the Pacific Northwest. USDA For. Serv. Tech. Bull. 201.
31. Midwestern Regional Climate Center. 2006. Midwest climate summaries [online]. Available from http://mcc.sws.uiuc.edu/climate_midwest/mwclimate_data_summaries.htm [accessed 21 April 2009].
32. Newman, D.H. 1988. The optimal forest rotation a discussion and annotated bibliography. USDA For. Serv. Gen. Tech. Rep. SE-48.
33. O'Hara, K.L. 2001. The silviculture of transformation - a commentary. For. Ecol. Manage. 151(1-3): 81-86. doi:10.1016/S0378-1127(00)00698-8.
34. Oliver, W.W. 2005. The west-wide Ponderosa pine levels-ofgrowing-stock study at age 40. In Proceedings of the symposium on Ponderosa pine: issues, trends, and management. Edited by M.W. Ritchie, D.A. Maguire, and A.P. Youngblood. USDA For. Serv. Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-GTR-198. pp. 71-80.
35. Payandeh, B. 1973. Plonski's yield tables formulated. Department of the Environment, Canadian Forestry Service, Ottawa, Ont.,Canada.
36. Plonski, W.L. 1974. Normal yield tables for major forest species in Ontario. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Forest Resource Group, Toronto, Ont. Canada.
37. Powers, M.D., Webster, C.R., Pregitzer, K.S., and Palik, B.J. 2009. Spatial dynamics of radial growth and growth efficiency in residual Pinus resinosa following aggregated retention harvesting. Can. J. For. Res. 39(1): 109-117. doi:10.1139/X08-162.
38. Pretzsch, H. 2005. Stand density and growth of Norway spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karst.) and European beech (Fagus sylvatica L.): evidence from long-term experimental plots. Eur. J. For. Res. 124(3): 193-205.
39. Roberts, S.D., and Harrington, C.A. 2008. Individual tree growth response to variable-density thinning in coastal Pacific Northwest forests. For. Ecol. Manage. 255(7): 2771-2781. doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2008.01.043.
40. Ryan, M.G., Binkley, D., and Fownes, J.H. 1997. Age-related decline in forest productivity: pattern and process. Adv. Ecol. Res. 27: 213-262. doi:10.1016/S0065-2504(08)60009-4.
41. SAS Institite Inc. 2010. SAS user's guide. Version 9.2 [computer program]. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, N.C., USA.
42. Seymour, R.S., and Hunter, M.L., Jr. 1999. Principles of ecological forestry. In Maintaining biodiversity in forest ecosystems. Edited by M.L. Hunter, Jr. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. pp. 22-64.
43. Seymour, R.S., White, A.S., and deMaynadier, P.G. 2002. Natural disturbance regimes in northeastern North America - evaluating silvicultural systems using natural scales and frequencies. For. Ecol. Manage. 155(1-3): 357-367. doi:10.1016/S0378-1127(01)00572-2.
44. Smith, F.W., and Long, J.N. 2001. Age-related decline in forest growth: an emergent property. For. Ecol. Manage. 144(1-3): 175-181. doi:10.1016/S0378-1127(00)00369-8
45. Smith, D.M., Larson, B.C., Kelty, M.J., and Ashton, P.M.S. 1997. The practice of silviculture. John Wiley and Sons, New York.
46. Sterba, H. 1987. Estimating potential density from thinning experiments and inventory data. For. Sci. 33(4): 1022-1034.
47. Stinson, S.D. 1999. 50 years of low thinning in second growth Douglas-fir. For. Chron. 75(3): 401-405.
48. Swanson, F.J., and Franklin, J.F. 1992. New forestry principles from ecosystem analysis of Pacific Northwest forests. Ecol. Appl. 2(3): 262-274. doi:10.2307/1941860.
49. Tappeiner, J.C., Huffman, D., Marshall, D., Spies, T.A., and Bailey, J.D. 1997. Density, ages, and growth rates in old-growth and young-growth forests in coastal Oregon. Can. J. For. Res. 27(5): 638-648. doi:10.1139/cjfr-27-5-638.
50. Youngblood, A.P. 1991. Radial growth after a shelterwood seed cut in a mature stand of white spruce in interior Alaska. Can. J. For. Res. 21(3): 410-413. doi:10.1139/x91-052.
51. Zenner, E.K., and Peck, J.E. 2009. Characterizing structural conditions in mature managed red pine: spatial dependency of metrics and adequacy of plot size. For. Ecol. Manage. 257(1): 311-320. doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2008.09.006