Advertisement

Current Forestry Reports

, Volume 3, Issue 2, pp 107–118 | Cite as

Corewood (Juvenile Wood) and Its Impact on Wood Utilisation

  • John R. Moore
  • Dave J. Cown
Wood Structure and Function (S Hiziroglu, Section Editor)
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Topical Collection on Wood Structure and Function

Abstract

Purpose of Review

Corewood (‘juvenile wood’) is found within the first 10–20 annual rings adjacent to the pith. This review focuses on describing the characteristics of corewood, the factors affecting its occurrence within a tree and the implications for wood utilisation.

Recent Findings

Corewood has been extensively researched across a wide range of commercial trees species, with a large focus on loblolly pine (Pinus taeda L.) and radiata pine (Pinus radiata D. Don). Recent studies have focussed on understanding the degree to which corewood extent and properties are affected by environmental, silvicultural and genetic factors. The impacts of corewood on dimension lumber, panel products and pulp and paper are generally well known, and recent research has examined the impact of corewood on the performance of newer products.

Summary

An increase in the proportion of corewood in the planted forest resource is inevitable due to an intensification of forestry practises and a drive for more cost-effective raw material production. The implications for wood processing can be positive or negative depending on the end product in question. Solving the problems posed by corewood may depend heavily on wood processors adapting their systems to accommodate the increased proportion of corewood in the future resource or changing the performance specifications for their products.

Keywords

Wood quality Wood products Corewood Juvenile wood Radial variation Plantation forestry 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank Drs Doug Maguire (Oregon State University) and Joseph Dahlen (University of Georgia) for assistance with obtaining information on North American studies. Dr. Rowland Burdon (Scion) provided helpful feedback and suggestions on an earlier draft of this manuscript.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

Drs Moore and Cown declare no conflicts of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: •Of importance ••Of major importance

  1. 1.
    Carle J, Holmgren P. Wood from planted forests: a global outlook 2005–2030. For Prod J. 2008;58(12):6–18.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cown D. Role of intensively managed forests in future timber supply. CAB Reviews: Perspectives in Agriculture, Veterinary Science, Nutrition and Natural Resources. 2007;2(023) doi: 10.1079/pavsnnr20072023.
  3. 3.
    Vance ED, Maguire DA, Zalesny Jr RS. Research strategies for increasing productivity of intensively managed forest plantations. J For. 2010;108:183–92.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fox TR, Jokela EJ, Allen HL. The evolution of pine plantation silviculture in the southern United States. Asheville: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station; 2004.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bunn EH. The nature of the resource. N Z J For. 1981;26(2):162–99.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Adams WT, Hobbs S, Johnson N. Intensively managed forest plantations in the Pacific Northwest: introduction. J For. 2005;103(2):58–60.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zobel B. The changing quality of the world wood supply. Wood Sci Tech. 1984;18(1):1–17. doi: 10.1007/bf00632127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Barbour RJ, Kellogg RM. Forest management and end-product quality: a Canadian perspective. Can J For Res. 1990;20:405–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Senft JF, Bendtsen BA, Galligan WL. Weak wood: fast-grown trees make problem lumber. J For. 1985;83(8):477–84.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Zhang SY. Wood quality attributes and their impacts on wood utilization. Quebec City: XII World Forestry Congress; 2003.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cown DJ. Corewood (juvenile wood) in Pinus radiata—should we be concerned? N Z J For Sci. 1992;22(1):87–95.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kennedy RW. Coniferous wood quality in the future: concerns and strategies. Wood Sci Tech. 1995;29(5):321–39. doi: 10.1007/bf00202581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Smith WR, Briggs DG. Juvenile wood: what does it mean to forest management and forest products? In: Forest Products Research Society Pacific Northwest Section, Society of American Foresters North Puget Sound Chapter, Society of American Foresters Portland Chapter. 1986:81pp.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ulvcrona T, Ahnlund UK. The effects of pre-commercial thinning and fertilization on characteristics of juvenile clearwood of Scots pine (Pinus Sylvestris L.). Forestry. 2011;84(3):207–19. doi: 10.1093/forestry/cpr007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    •• Zobel BJ, Sprague JR. Juvenile wood in forest trees. Berlin: Springer; 1998. This book provides a comprehensive review on juvenile wood (corewood) including a description of its properties, factors affecting its incidence and impacts on product performance. Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Amarasekara H, Denne MP. Effects of crown size on wood characteristics of Corsican pine in relation to definitions of juvenile wood, crown formed wood and core wood. Forestry. 2002;75(1):51–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Larson PR. Wood formation and the concept of wood quality. New Haven: Yale University; 1969.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    • Lachenbruch B, Moore JR, Evans R. Radial variation in wood structure and function in woody plants, and hypotheses for its occurrence. In: Meinzer FC, Lachenbruch B, Dawson TE, editors. Size- and age-related changes in tree structure and function. Berlin: Springer-Verlag; 2011. p. 121–64. This chapter describes the typical radial pattern in wood properties that exist in trees and discusses some of the potential underlying causal mechanisms that are responsible for this pattern. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    • Burdon RD, Kibblewhite RP, Walker JCF, Megraw RA, Evans R, Cown DJ. Juvenile versus mature wood: a new concept, orthogonal to corewood versus outerwood, with special reference to Pinus radiata and P. taeda. For Sci. 2004;50(4):399–415. This paper attempts to rationalise and standardise the terminology by developing two separate concepts: juvenility versus maturity to describe axial variation in wood properties; and corewood versus outerwood to describe variations from pith to bark. Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bendtsen BA. Properties of wood from improved and intensively managed trees. For Prod J. 1978;28(10):61–71.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Walker JCF, Butterfield B. The importance of microfibril angle for the processing industries. N Z J For. 1995;40(4):34–40.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Zobel BJ, van Buijtenen JP. Wood variation: its causes and control. Berlin: Springer-Verlag; 1989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Jozsa LA. Relative density. In Second growth Douglas-fir: its management and conversion for value. Forintek Canada Corp. 1989;SP-32:5–22.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Jozsa LA, Middleton GR. A discussion of wood quality attributes and their practical implications. In Special Publication SP-34, Forintek Canada Corp, Vancouver, BC. 1995.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Mansfield SD, Parish R, Ott PK, Hart JF, Goudie JW. Assessing the wood quality of interior spruce (Picea glauca × P. engelmannii): variation in strength, relative density, microfibril angle, and fiber length. Holzforschung. 2016;70(3) doi: 10.1515/hf-2015-0008.
  26. 26.
    Abdel-Gadir AY, Krahmer RL. Estimating the age of demarcation of juvenile and mature wood in Douglas-fir. Wood Fiber Sci. 1993;25(3):242–9.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Chen ZQ, Abramowicz K, Raczkowski R, Ganea S, Wu HX, Lundqvist SO, et al. Method for accurate fiber length determination from increment cores for large-scale population analyses in Norway spruce. Holzforschung. 2016;70(9):829–38. doi: 10.1515/hf-2015-0138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Wang M, Stewart JD. Determining the transition from juvenile to mature wood microfibril angle in lodgepole pine: a comparison of six different two-segment models. Ann For Sci. 2012;69(8):927–37. doi: 10.1007/s13595-012-0226-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Wang M, Stewart JD. Modeling the transition from juvenile to mature wood using modulus of elasticity in lodgepole pine. West J Appl For. 2013;28(4):135–42. doi: 10.5849/wjaf.12-026.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Clark III A, Daniels RF, Jordan L. Juvenile/mature wood transition in loblolly pine as defined by annual ring specific gravity, proportion of latewood, and microfibril angle. Wood Fiber Sci. 2006;38(2):292–9.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Mansfield SD, Parish R, Di Lucca CM, Goudie J, Kang KY, Ott P. Revisiting the transition between juvenile and mature wood: a comparison of fibre length, microfibril angle and relative wood density in lodgepole pine. Holzforschung. 2009;63(4):449–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Alteyrac J, Cloutier A, Zhang SY. Characterization of juvenile wood to mature wood transition age in black spruce (Picea mariana (Mill.) BSP) at different stand densities and sampling heights. Wood Sci Tech. 2006;40(2):124–38. doi: 10.1007/s00226-005-0047-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Lourençon TV, Mattos BD, Gatto DA, Buligon EA, Haselein CR. Determination of the age of transition from juvenile to mature wood for three forest species by mechanical properties. Floresta e Ambiente. 2014;21(2):251–60. doi: 10.4322/floram.2014.021.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Trevisan R. Motta CId, Fioresi T, Trautenmüller AV, Rabuske JE, Denardi L. Idade de segregação do lenho juvenil e adulto para Pinus elliottii Engel [Age of segregation of juvenile and mature Pinus elliottii Engel wood]. Ciência Rural. 2014;44(4):634–8. doi: 10.1590/s0103-84782014000400010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Koubaa A, Isabel N, Zhang SY, Beaulieu J, Bousquet J. Transition from juvenile to mature wood in black spruce (Picea mariana (Mill.) B.S.P.). Wood Fiber Sci. 2005;37(3):445–55.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Evans II JW, Senft JF, Green DW. Juvenile wood effect in red alder: analysis of physical and mechanical data to delineate juvenile and mature wood zones. For Prod J. 2000;50(7/8):75–87.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Gapare WJ, Wu HX, Abarquez A. Genetic control of the time of transition from juvenile to mature wood in Pinus radiata D Don. Annals of Forest Science. 2006;63(8):871–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Kilpatrick DJ, Sanderson JM, Savill PS. The influence of five early respacing treatments on the growth of Sitka spruce. Forestry. 1981;54(1):17–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Clark III A, Saucier JR. Influence of initial planting density, geographic location, and species on juvenile wood formation in southern pine. For Prod J. 1989;39(7/8):42–8.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Larson PR, Kretschmann DE, Clark AI, Isebrands JG. Formation and properties of juvenile wood in southern pines: a synopsis. US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southeastern Forest Experiment Station General technical report FPL-GTR-129. 2001:42pp.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Tanabe J, Ishiguri F, Tamura A, Ohshima J, Iizuka K, Yokota S. Radial and between-family variations of the microfibril angle and the relationships with bending properties in Picea jezoensis families. Scand J For Res. 2016;32(1):39–44. doi: 10.1080/02827581.2016.1186217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    McLean JP, Moore JR, Gardiner BA, Lee SJ, Mochan SJ, Jarvis MC. Variation of radial wood properties from genetically improved Sitka spruce growing in the UK. Forestry. 2016;89(2):109–16. doi: 10.1093/forestry/cpv035.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Girardon S, Denaud L, Pot G, Rahayu I. Modelling the effects of wood cambial age on the effective modulus of elasticity of poplar laminated veneer lumber. Ann For Sci. 2016;73(3):615–24. doi: 10.1007/s13595-016-0569-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Palermo GPDM, Latorraca JVDF, de Carvalho AM, Calonego FW, Severo ETD. Anatomical properties of Eucalyptus grandis wood and transition age between the juvenile and mature woods. European Journal of Wood and Wood Products. 2015;73(6):775–80. doi: 10.1007/s00107-015-0947-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Mvolo C, Koubaa A, Beaulieu J, Cloutier A, Mazerolle M. Variation in wood quality in white spruce (Picea glauca (Moench) Voss). Part I. Defining the juvenile–mature wood transition based on tracheid length. Forests. 2015;6(1):183–202. doi: 10.3390/f6010183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Giroud G, Defo M, Bégin J, Ung C-H. Application of near-infrared spectroscopy to determine the juvenile–mature wood transition in black spruce. For Prod J. 2015;65(3–4):129–38. doi: 10.13073/fpj-d-14-00045.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Darmawan W, Sari RK, Sitompul A, Gardner D, Nandika D, Rahayu I. Juvenile and mature wood characteristics of short and long rotation teak in Java. IAWA J. 2015;36(4):428–42. doi: 10.1163/22941932-20150112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Alteyrac J. Variation of microfibril angle of Pinus radiata D. Don in relation to tree spacing in Chilean plantations. Revista Árvore. 2015;39(4):751–8. doi: 10.1590/0100-67622015000400018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Bendtsen BA, Senft J. Mechanical and anatomical properties in individual growth rings of plantation-grown eastern cottonwood and loblolly pine. Wood Fiber Sci. 1986;18:23–8.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Jordan L, He R, Hall DB, Clark III A, Daniels RF. Variation in loblolly pine ring microfibril angle in the southeastern United States. Wood Fiber Sci. 2007;39(2):352–63.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Bao FC, Jiang ZH, Jiang XM, Lu XX, Luo XQ, Zhang SY. Differences in wood properties between juvenile wood and mature wood in 10 species grown in China. Wood Sci Tech. 2001;35(4):363–75. doi: 10.1007/s002260100099.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Kimberley MO, Cown DJ, McKinley RB, Moore JR, Dowling LJ. Modelling variation in wood density within and among trees in stands of New Zealand-grown radiata pine. N Z J For Sci. 2015;45(1) doi: 10.1186/s40490-015-0053-8.
  53. 53.
    Moore JR, Cown DJ, McKinley RB. Modelling microfibril angle variation in New Zealand-grown radiata pine. N Z J For Sci. 2014;44(1):25. doi: 10.1186/s40490-014-0025-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Moore JR, Cown DJ, McKinley RB. Modelling spiral grain angle variation in New Zealand-grown radiata pine. N Z J For Sci. 2015;45(1) doi: 10.1186/s40490-015-0046-7.
  55. 55.
    Antony F, Jordan L, Schimleck LR, Clark III A, Souter RA, Daniels RF. Regional variation in wood modulus of elasticity (stiffness) and modulus of rupture (strength) of planted loblolly pine in the United States. Can J For Res. 2011;41(7):1522–33. doi: 10.1139/x11-064.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Auty D, Achim A, Macdonald E, Cameron AD, Gardiner BA. Models for predicting wood density variation in Scots pine. Forestry. 2014;87(3):449–58. doi: 10.1093/forestry/cpu005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Auty D, Gardiner BA, Achim A, Moore JR, Cameron AD. Models for predicting microfibril angle variation in Scots pine. Ann For Sci. 2013;70:209–18. doi: 10.1007/s13595-012-0248-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Josza L, Middleton GR. A discussion of wood qualilty attributes and their pactical implications 1994.Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Antony F, Schimleck LR, Jordan L, Daniels RF, Clark III A. Modeling the effect of initial planting density on within tree variation of stiffness in loblolly pine. Ann For Sci. 2012;69:641–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Moore JR, Cown DJ, McKinley RB, Sabatia CO. Effects of stand density and seedlot on three wood properties of young radiata pine grown at a dry-land site in New Zealand. N Z J For Sci. 2015;45 doi: 10.1186/s40490-015-0035-7.
  61. 61.
    Lasserre JP, Mason EG, Watt MS, Moore JR. Influence of initial planting spacing and genotype on microfibril angle, wood density, fibre properties and modulus of elasticity in Pinus radiata D. Don corewood. For Ecol Manage. 2009;258(9):1924–31. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2009.07.028.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Lasserre J-P, Mason EG, Watt MS. The effects of genotype and spacing on Pinus radiata [D. Don] corewood stiffness in an 11-year old experiment. For Ecol Manag. 2005;205(1–3):375–83. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2004.10.037.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Zhang SY, Chauret G, Swift DE, Duchensne I. Effects of precommercial thinning on tree growth and lumber quality in a jack pine stand in New Brunswick. Canada Canadian Journal of Forest Research. 2006;36:945–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Pape R. Effects of thinning regime on the wood properties and stem quality of Picea abies. Scand J For Res. 1999;14(1):38–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Auty D, Weiskittel AR, Achim A, Moore JR, Gardiner BA. Influence of early re-spacing on Sitka spruce branch structure. Ann For Sci. 2012;69(1):93–104. doi: 10.1007/s13595-011-0141-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Alteyrac J, Zhang SY, Cloutier A, Ruel JC. Influence of stand density on ring width and wood denisity at different sampling heights in black spruce (Picea mariana (Mill.) BSP). Wood Fiber Sci. 2005;37(1):83–94.Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Cown DJ, McConchie DL. Effects of thinning and fertiliser application on the wood properties of Pinus radiata. N Z J For Sci. 1981;11(2):79–91.Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Cameron A, Thomas K. Effect of thinning on the development of compression wood in stems of Corsican pine. Eur J For Res. 2008;127(3):247–51. doi: 10.1007/s10342-007-0200-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Lowell EC, Maguire DA, Briggs DG, Turnblom EC, Jayawickrama KJS, Bryce J. Effects of silviculture and genetics on branch/knot attributes of coastal pacific northwest douglas-fir and implications for wood quality—a synthesis. Forests. 2014;5(7):1717–36. doi: 10.3390/f5071717.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Brazier JD, Mobbs ID. The influence of planting distance on structural wood yields of unthinned Sitka spruce. Forestry. 1993;66:333–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Moore J, Achim A, Lyon A, Mochan S, Gardiner B. Effects of early re-spacing on the physical and mechanical properties of Sitka spruce structural timber. For Ecol Manag. 2009;258(7):1174–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Cameron AD. Importance of early selective thinning in the development of long-term stand stability and improved log quality: a review. Forestry. 2002;75(1):25–35. doi: 10.1093/forestry/75.1.25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Clark III A, Borders BE, Daniels RF. Impact of vegetation control and annual fertilization on properties of loblolly pine wood at age 12. For Prod J. 2004;54(12):90–6.Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Wu HX, Ivković M, Gapare WJ, Matheson AC, Baltunis BS, Powell MB, et al. Breeding for wood quality and profit in Pinus radiata: a review of genetic parameter estimates and implications for breeding and deployment. N Z J For Sci. 2008;38(1):56–87.Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Hannrup B, Cahalan C, Chantre G, Grabner M, Karlsson B, Bayon IL, et al. Genetic parameters of growth and wood quality traits in Picea abies. Scand J For Res. 2004;19(1):14–29. doi: 10.1080/02827580310019536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Gapare W, Hathorn A, Kain D, Matheson C, Wu H. Inheritance of spiral grain in the juvenile core of Pinus radiata. Can J For Res. 2007;37(1):116–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Gapare WJ, Baltunis BS, Ivković M, Wu HX. Genetic correlations among juvenile wood quality and growth traits and implications for selection strategy in Pinus radiata D. Don. Annals of Forest Science. 2009;66(6):606. doi: 10.1051/forest/2009044.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Hong Z, Fries A, Wu HX. Age trend of heritability, genetic correlation, and efficiency of early selection for wood quality traits in Scots pine. Can J For Res. 2015;45(7):817–25. doi: 10.1139/cjfr-2014-0465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Urhan OS, Kolpak SE, Jayawickrama KJS, Howe GT. Early genetic selection for wood stiffness in juvenile Douglas-fir and western hemlock. For Ecol Manag. 2014;320:104–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Evison DC, Apiolaza LA. Incorporating economic weights into radiata pine breeding selection decisions. Can J For Res. 2014;45(1):135–40. doi: 10.1139/cjfr-2014-0363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Ridoutt BG, Sorensson CT, Lausberg MJF. Wood properties of twenty highly ranked radiata pine seed production parents selected for growth and form. Wood Fiber Sci. 1998;30(2):128–37.Google Scholar
  82. 82.
    Cown DJ, Sorensson C. Can use of clones improve wood quality? N Z J For. 2008;52(4):14–9.Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    Panshin AJ, de Zeeuw C. Textbook of wood technology. 4th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1980.Google Scholar
  84. 84.
    Brolin A, Noren A, Stahl EG. Wood and pulp characteristics of juvenile Norway spruce: a comparison between a forest and an agricultural stand. TAPPI J. 1995;78(4):203–14.Google Scholar
  85. 85.
    Miles KB, Omholt I. Thermomechanical pulp from jack pine. Journal of Pulp and Paper Science. 2007;33(3):171–6.Google Scholar
  86. 86.
    Myers GC. Thermomechanical pulping of loblolly pine juvenile wood. Wood Fiber Sci. 2002;34(1):108–15.Google Scholar
  87. 87.
    Peters JJ, Bender DA, Wolcott MP, Johnson JD. Selected wood properties of hybrid poplar clearwood and composite panels. For Prod J. 2002;52(5):45–54.Google Scholar
  88. 88.
    Wolfe R. Research challenges for structural use of small-diameter round timbers. For Prod J. 2000;50(2):21–9.Google Scholar
  89. 89.
    Moore JR, Cown DJ. Processing of wood for wood composites. In: Ansell MP, editor. Wood composites. Cambridge: Woodhead Publishing; 2015. p. 27–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Moore JR, Lyon AJ, Lehneke SJ. Effects of rotation length on the grade recovery and wood properties of Sitka spruce structural timber grown in Great Britain. Ann For Sci. 2012;69:353–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Ivkovich M, Gapare WJ, Abarquez A, Ilic J, Powell MB, Wu HX. Prediction of wood stiffness, strength, and shrinkage in juvenile wood of radiata pine. Wood Sci Tech. 2009;43(3–4):237–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Ying L, Kretschmann DE, Bendtsen BA. Longitudinal shrinkage in fast-grown loblolly pine plantation wood. For Prod J. 1994;44(1):58–62.Google Scholar
  93. 93.
    Saranpää P. Basic density, longitudinal shrinkage and tracheid length of juvenile wood of Picea abies (L.) Karst. Scand J For Res. 1994;9(1–4):68–74. doi: 10.1080/02827589409382814.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Harding OV, Turner J, Hebert J. Performance of radiata pine as moulding raw material. For Prod J. 1999;49(9):69–78.Google Scholar
  95. 95.
    Cown DJ, Haslett AN, Kimberley MO, McConchie DL. The influence of wood quality on lumber drying distortion. Annales des Sciences Forestieres. 1996;53(6):1177–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Perstorper M, Johansson M, Kliger R, Johansson G. Distortion of Norway spruce timber. Part 1. Variation of relevant wood properties. Holz als Roh - und Werkstoff. 2001;59(1–2):94–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Perstorper M, Pellicane PJ, Kliger RI, Johansson G. Quality of timber products from Norway spruce. Part 2. Influence of spatial position and growth characteristics on warp. Wood Sci Tech. 1995;29:339–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    Wagner FG, Gorman TM, Pratt KL, Keegan CE. Warp, MOE, and grade of structural lumber curve sawn from small-diameter Douglas-fir logs. For Prod J. 2002;52(1):27–31.Google Scholar
  99. 99.
    Kretschmann DE, Bendtsen BA. Ultimate tensile strength and modulus of elasticity of fast-grown plantation loblolly pine lumber. Wood Fiber Sci. 1992;24(2):189–203.Google Scholar
  100. 100.
    Butler MA, Dahlen J, Daniels RF, Eberhardt TL, Antony F. Bending strength and stiffness of loblolly pine lumber from intensively managed stands located on the Georgia Lower Coastal Plain. European Journal of Wood and Wood Products. 2015;74(1):91–100. doi: 10.1007/s00107-015-0956-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    Ong CB. Glue-laminated timber (glulam). In: Ansell MP, editor. Wood composites. Cambridge: Woodhead Publishing; 2015. p. 123–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. 102.
    Lee JJ, Park JS, Kim KM, Oh JK. Prediction of bending properties for structural glulam using optimized distributions of knot characteristics and laminar MOE. J Wood Sci. 2005;51(6):640–7. doi: 10.1007/s10086-005-0704-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. 103.
    Harris R. Cross laminated timber. In: Ansell MP, editor. Wood composites. Cambridge: Woodhead Publishing; 2015. p. 141–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. 104.
    Hughes M. Plywood and other veneer-based products. In: Ansell MP, editor. Wood composites. Cambridge: Woodhead Publishing; 2015. p. 69–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. 105.
    Shupe TF, Hse CY, Grozdits GA, Choong ET. Effect of silvicultural practice and veneer grade layup on some mechanical properties of loblolly pine plywood. For Prod J. 1997;47(10):101–6.Google Scholar
  106. 106.
    MacPeak MO, Burkhart LF, Weldon D. A mill study of the quality, yield, and mechanical properties of plywood produced from fast-grown loblolly pine. For Prod J. 1987;37(2):51–6.Google Scholar
  107. 107.
    Kretschmann DE, Moody RC, Pellerin RF, Bendtsen BA, Cahill JM, McAlister RH, et al. Effect of various proportions of juvenile wood on laminated veneer lumber. Madison: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest Products Laboratory; 1993.Google Scholar
  108. 108.
    Harding OV, Orange RP. The effect of juvenile wood and lay-up practices on various properties of radiata pine laminated veneer lumber. For Prod J. 1998;48(7/8):63–70.Google Scholar
  109. 109.
    Nazerian M, Ghalehno MD, Kashkooli AB. Effect of wood species, amount of juvenile wood and heat treatment on mechanical and physical properties of laminated veneer lumber. J Appl Sci. 2011;11(6):980–7. doi: 10.3923/jas.2011.980.987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. 110.
    Biblis EJ. Comparison of flexural and shear properties of southern pine LVL and lumber from young plantation and natural stands. Ann Sci For. 1996;53(6):1167–75. doi: 10.1051/forest:19960610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. 111.
    Shupe TF, Hse CY, Groom LH, Choong ET. Effect of silvicultural practice and veneer grade layup on some mechanical properties of loblolly pine LVL. For Prod J. 1997;47(9):63–9.Google Scholar
  112. 112.
    Pugel AD, Price EW, Hse CY. Composites from southern pine juvenile wood. Part 1. Panel fabrication and initial properties. For Prod J. 1989;40(1):29–33.Google Scholar
  113. 113.
    Pugel AD, Price EW, Hse CY. Composites from southern pine juvenile wood. Part 2. Durability and dimensional stability. For Prod J. 1990;40(3):57–61.Google Scholar
  114. 114.
    Geimer RL, Herian VL, Xu D. Influence of juvenile wood on dimensional stability and tensile properties of flakeboard. Wood Fiber Sci. 1997;29(2):103–20.Google Scholar
  115. 115.
    Shupe TF, Hse CY, Choong ET, Groom LH. Effect of silvicultural practice and wood type on loblolly pine particleboard and medium density fiberboard properties. Holzforschung. 1999;53(2):215–22. doi: 10.1515/hf.1999.036.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. 116.
    Cloutier A, Ananias RA, Ballerini A, Pecho R. Effect of radiata pine juvenile wood on the physical and mechanical properties of oriented strandboard. Holz Roh Werkst. 2006;65(2):157–62. doi: 10.1007/s00107-006-0148-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. 117.
    Corson SR. Wood characteristics influence pine TMP quality. TAPPI J. 1991;74(11):135–46.Google Scholar
  118. 118.
    Corson SR, Richardson JD. Fast-grown PGW fibre for superior communication papers. Appita Journal. 2007;60(2):144–9.Google Scholar
  119. 119.
    Cown DJ, Kibblewhite RP. Effects of wood quality variation in New Zealand radiata pine kraft paper properties. N Z J For Sci. 1980;10:521–32.Google Scholar
  120. 120.
    Kibblewhite RP. Pinus radiata wood residue qualities and some utilisation options. N Z J For Sci. 1984;14(3):382–94.Google Scholar
  121. 121.
    Kibblewhite RP. Radiata pine corewood and slabwood, and their interrelations with pulp and handsheet properties. N Z J For Sci. 1980;10(3):533–50.Google Scholar
  122. 122.
    Molteberg D, Høibø O. Development and variation of wood density, kraft pulp yield and fibre dimensions in young Norway spruce (Picea abies). Wood Sci Tech. 2006;40(3):173–89. doi: 10.1007/s00226-005-0020-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  123. 123.
    Courchene CE, Cooper WJ, Clark Iii A, Shiver BD, Belli ML, editors. Effects of intensive silvicultural treatments on kraft pulp quality of loblolly and slash pine. TAPPI Pulping/Process and Product Quality Conference; 2000.Google Scholar
  124. 124.
    Corson SR. Influence of wood quality characteristics on TMP and RMP from New Zealand-grown radiata pine. Appita. 1984;37(5):400–8.Google Scholar
  125. 125.
    Lecourt M, Bouvet A, Deleuze-Brezins C. Modelling TMP fibre morphology and pulp properties from wood and forest data: the example of Norway spruce. N Z J For Sci. 2006;36(2/3):435–51.Google Scholar
  126. 126.
    Corson SR, Flowers AG, Morgan DG, Richardson JD. Paper structure and printability as controlled by the fibrous elements. TAPPI J. 2004;3(6):14–8.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.ScionRotoruaNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations