Advertisement

New Forests

, Volume 49, Issue 1, pp 67–85 | Cite as

Influence of browsing damage and overstory cover on regeneration of American beech and sugar maple nine years following understory herbicide release in central Maine

  • Arun K. BoseEmail author
  • Robert G. Wagner
  • Brian E. Roth
  • Aaron R. Weiskittel
Article

Abstract

Northern hardwood stands, notably those with American beech (Fagus grandifolia Ehrh), sugar maple (Acer saccharum Marsh.), and yellow birch (Betula alleghaniensis Britton), are abundant across the forested landscapes of northeastern USA and southeastern Canada. Recent studies have reported an increasing dominance of American beech in the understory and midstory of these forests. Beech is a commercially less desirable tree species due to its association with beech-bark disease, and because it commonly interferes with the regeneration of other more desirable tree species. We examined hardwood regeneration characteristics nine years after application of a 3 × 4 factorial combination of glyphosate herbicide (0.56, 1.12, and 1.68 kg ha−1) and surfactant concentrations (0.0, 0.25, 0.5, and 1.0% v v−1) to release sugar maple regeneration from beech-dominated understories using three stands that received shelterwood seed cutting in central Maine. Measurements nine years after treatment showed that glyphosate rate increased both absolute (AD) and relative density (RD) of sugar maple regeneration, but not its height (HT). In contrast, beech AD, RD, and HT were all significantly reduced with increasing glyphosate rate. Post-release browsing by ungulates and a high residual overstory basal area resulted in reduced sugar maple HT. Our results indicated that glyphosate herbicide applied in stands that have been recently shelterwood seed cut can significantly increase the abundance of sugar maple regeneration. However, subsequent browsing damage combined with the negative influence of the residual overstory cover can limit the longer-term benefit of understory herbicide treatments. Subsequent removal of the overstory and browsing-control measures may be needed to promote sugar maple regeneration over beech in similar northern hardwood stands.

Keywords

Northern hardwoods of USA Natural regeneration Glyphosate Surfactant Browsing Canopy influences Vegetation management Beech control 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We are thankful to Rob and Emma-Grace Nelson for their outstanding technical support in relocating and remeasuring the experimental plots used in this study, and Dr. Andrew Nelson for providing the data of pre- and post-harvest measurements. Funding for this work was provided by the National Science Foundation Center for Advanced Forestry Systems (CAFS) and the Cooperative Forest Research Unit (CFRU), University of Maine.

Supplementary material

11056_2017_9605_MOESM1_ESM.docx (785 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 784 kb)

References

  1. Angers VA, Messier C, Beaudet M, Leduc A (2005) Comparing composition and structure in old-growth and harvested (selection and diameter-limit cuts) northern hardwood stands in Quebec. For Ecol Manag 217:275–293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baron WR, Smith DC, Borns HW, Fastook J, Bridges AE (1980) Long-time series temperature and precipitation records for Maine: 1808–1978. Maine Agric Exp Stn Bull 771:255Google Scholar
  3. Bartoń K (2013) MuMIn: multi-model inference. R package version 1Google Scholar
  4. Beaudet M, Messier C (1998) Growth and morphological responses of yellow birch, sugar maple, and beech seedlings growing under a natural light gradient. Can J For Res 28:1007–1015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Beaudet M, Messier C (2008) Beech regeneration of seed and root sucker origin: a comparison of morphology, growth, survival, and response to defoliation. For Ecol Manage 255:3659–3666CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Beaudet M, Messier C, Pare D, Brisson J, Bergeron Y (1999) Possible mechanisms of sugar maple regeneration failure and replacement by beech in the Boisé-des-Muir old-growth forest, Québec. Ecoscience 6(2):264–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Beaudet M, Brisson J, Gravel D, Messier C (2007) Effect of a major canopy disturbance on the coexistence of Acer saccharum and Fagus grandifolia in the understorey of an old-growth forest. J Ecol 95:458–467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Beguin J, Prevost M, Pothier D, Cote SD (2009) Establishment of natural regeneration under severe browsing pressure from white-tailed deer after group seed-tree cutting with scarification on Anticosti Island. Can J For Res 39:596–605CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bose AK, Weiskittel A, Wagner RG, Kuehne C (2016) Assessing the factors influencing natural regeneration patterns in the diverse, multi-cohort, and managed forests of Maine, USA. J Veg Sci 27(6):1140–1150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bose AK, Weiskittel A, Wagner RG (2017a) Occurrence, pattern of change, and factors associated with American beech-dominance in stands of the northeastern USA forest. For Ecol Manage 392:202–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bose AK, Weiskittel A, Wagner RG (2017b) A three decade assessment of climate-associated changes in forest composition across the north-eastern USA. J Appl Ecol. doi: 10.1111/1365-2664.12917
  12. Brisson J, Bergeron Y, Bouchard A, Leduc A (1994) Beech-maple dynamics in an old-growth forest in southern Québec, Canada. Ecoscience 1:40–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Burnham KP, Anderson DR (2002) Model selection and multi-model inference: a practical information-theoretic approach. Springler-Verlag, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. Canham CD (1990) Suppression and release during canopy recruitment in Fagus grandifolia. Bull Torrey Bot Club 117:1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Duchesne L, Ouimet R (2009) Present-day expansion of American beech in northeastern hardwood forests: Does soil base status matter? Can J For Res 39:2273–2282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Farnsworth CE, Richards NA (1971) Effects of cutting level on regeneration of northern hardwoods protected from deer. J For 69:230–233Google Scholar
  17. Farrar A, Ostrofsky WD (2006) Dynamics of American beech regeneration 10 years following harvesting in a beech bark disease-affected stand in Maine. North J Appl For 23:192–196Google Scholar
  18. Hane EN (2003) Indirect effects of beech bark disease on sugar maple seedling survival. Can J For Res 33:807–813CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hibbs DE (1982) Gap dynamics in a hemlock–hardwood forest. Can J For Res 12:522–527CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Horsley SB, Bjorkbom JC (1983) Herbicide treatment of striped maple and beech in Allegheny hardwood stands. For Sci 29:103–112Google Scholar
  21. Horsley SB, Stout SL, DeCalesta DS (2003) White-tailed deer impact on the vegetation dynamics of a northern hardwood forest. Ecol Appl 13:98–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Houston DR (1975) Beech bark disease—the aftermath forests are structured for a new outbreak. J For 73:660–663Google Scholar
  23. Jones RH, Raynal DJ (1988) Root sprouting in American beech (Fagus grandifolia): effects of root injury, root exposure, and season. For Ecol Manag 25:79–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kasson M, Livingston W (2012) Relationships among beech bark disease, climate, radial growth response and mortality of American beech in northern Maine, USA. For Pathol 42:199–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kelty MJ, Nyland RD (1981) Regenerating Adirondack northern hardwoods by shelterwood cutting and control of deer density. J For 79:22–26Google Scholar
  26. Kobe RK, Pacala SW, Silander JA Jr, Canham CD (1995) Juvenile tree survivorship as a component of shade tolerance. Ecol Appl 5:517–532CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kochenderfer JD, Kochenderfer JN, Warner DA, Miller GW (2004) Preharvest manual herbicide treatments for controlling American beech in central West Virginia. North J Appl For 21:40–49Google Scholar
  28. Mazerolle MJ (2006) Improving data analysis in herpetology: using Akaike’s Information Criterion (AIC) to assess the strength of biological hypotheses. Amphib Reptil 27:169–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Mazerolle MJ (2011) AICcmodavg: model selection and multimodel inference based on (Q) AIC (c). R package version 1Google Scholar
  30. Messier C, Doucet R, Ruel J-C, Claveau Y, Kelly C, Lechowicz MJ (1999) Functional ecology of advance regeneration in relation to light in boreal forests. Can J For Res 29:812–823CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Morin RS, Liebhold AM, Tobin PC, Gottschalk KW, Luzader E (2007) Spread of beech bark disease in the eastern United States and its relationship to regional forest composition. Can J For Res 37:726–736CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Nelson AS, Wagner RG (2011) Improving the composition of beech-dominated northern hardwood understories in northern Maine. North J Appl For 28:186–193Google Scholar
  33. Nolet P, Bouffard D, Doyon F, Delagrange S (2008) Relationship between canopy disturbance history and current sapling density of Fagus grandifolia and Acer saccharum in a northern hardwood landscape. Can J For Res 38:216–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Nyland RD, Bashant AL, Bohn KK, Verostek JM (2006a) Interference to hardwood regeneration in northeastern North America: controlling effects of American beech, striped maple, and hobblebush. North J Appl For 23:122–132Google Scholar
  35. Nyland RD, Bashant AL, Bohn KK, Verostek JM (2006b) Interference to hardwood regeneration in northeastern North America: ecological characteristics of American beech, striped maple, and hobblebush. North J Appl For 23:53–61Google Scholar
  36. Ostrofsky WD, McCormack ML (1986) Silvicultural management of beech and the beech bark disease. North J Appl For 3:89–91Google Scholar
  37. Pinheiro J, Bates D, DebRoy S, Sarkar D (2014) nlme: linear and nonlinear mixed effects models. R package version 3.1-117. https://cran.rproject.org/web/packages/nlme/index.html
  38. Pitt D, Thompson D, Payne N, Kettela E (1993) Response of woody eastern Canadian forest weeds to fall foliar treatments of glyphosate and triclopyr herbicides. Can J For Res 23:2490–2498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Poorter L, Bongers F, Sterck FJ, Wöll H (2005) Beyond the regeneration phase: differentiation of height–light trajectories among tropical tree species. J Ecol 93:256–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. R Development Core Team (2014) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R. Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. www.r-project.org
  41. Rooney TP (2001) Deer impacts on forest ecosystems: a North American perspective. Forestry 74:201–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Rooney TP, Buttenschøn R, Madsen P, Olesen CR, Royo AA, Stout SL (2015) Integrating ungulate herbivory into forest landscape restoration. In: Stanturf JA (ed) Restoration of boreal and temperate forests, 2nd edn. CRC Press LLC, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  43. Runkle JR (2007) Impacts of beech bark disease and deer browsing on the old-growth forest. Am Midl Nat 157:241–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Sage RWJ, Porter WF, Underwood HB (2003) Windows of opportunity: white-tailed deer and the dynamics of northern hardwood forests in the northeastern US. J Nat Conserv 10:213–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Seymour RS (1995) The northeastern region. In: Barrett JW (ed) Regional silviculture of the United States. Wiley, New York, pp 31–79Google Scholar
  46. Tripler CE, Canham CD, Inouye RS, Schnurr JL (2005) Competitive hierarchies of temperate tree species: interactions between resource availability and white-tailed deer. Ecoscience 12:494–505CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (2008) Web soil survey. websoilsurveynrcsusdagov/app/HomePagehtm. Accessed May 26 2016Google Scholar
  48. Wagner S, Collet C, Madsen P, Nakashizuka T, Nyland RD, Sagheb-Talebi K (2010) Beech regeneration research: from ecological to silvicultural aspects. For Ecol Manag 259:2172–2182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Webb WL, King RT, Patric EF (1956) Effect of white-tailed deer on mature northern hardwood forest. J For 54:391–398Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Arun K. Bose
    • 1
    Email author
  • Robert G. Wagner
    • 2
  • Brian E. Roth
    • 1
  • Aaron R. Weiskittel
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Forest ResourcesUniversity of MaineOronoUSA
  2. 2.Department of Forestry and Natural ResourcesPurdue UniversityWest LafayetteUSA

Personalised recommendations