Advertisement

New Forests

, Volume 13, Issue 1–3, pp 315–328 | Cite as

Transplant Stress Index: A proposed method of quantifying planting check

  • David B. South
  • Janusz B. Zwolinski
Article

Abstract

This paper demonstrates a simple way of estimating the intensity and duration of planting check by examining height growth patterns. A “transplant stress index” is determined by the relationship between initial seedling height and subsequent height growth. This index is defined as the slope of a linear relationship between initial height and height increment. If the slope is negative, the plants (as a population) are said to be experiencing planting check. When the slope is approximately zero, the stock is said to be recovering from planting check. A steep positive slope suggests the stock has recovered from planting check. TSI values were determined for several conifers including Pinus elliottii Engelm. var. elliottii, Pinus taeda L., Pinus radiata D. Don, Picea sitchensis (Bongard) Carrière, and Larix× eurolepis Henry.

growth analysis nursery planting shock seedling quality transplant shock 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Adams, J. C. 1988. Transplant shock effects on water oak (Quercus nigraL.) provenance study, pp. 128–133. In: Worrall, J., Loo-Dinkins, J., Lester, D. P (Eds) Proc. 10th North American Forest Biology Workshop, July 10–22, 1988, University of British Columbia.Google Scholar
  2. Bacon, G. J., Hawkins, P. J. and Jermyn, D. 1977. Morphological grading studies with 1–0 slash pine seedlings. Aust. For. 40: 293–303.Google Scholar
  3. Beineke, W. F. and Perry, T. O. 1965. Genetic variation in ability to withstand transplanting shock, pp. 106–109. In: Proc. of the 8th South. Conf. on For. Tree Improvement, June 16–17, 1965, Savannah, GA.Google Scholar
  4. Bengston, G. W. 1963. Slash pine selected from nurserybeds: 8-year performance record. J. For. 61: 422–425.Google Scholar
  5. Bernier, P. Y. 1993. Comparing natural and planted black spruce seedlings. I. Water relations and growth. Can. J. Forest Res. 23: 2427–2434.Google Scholar
  6. Blake, T. J. 1983. Transplanting shock in white spruce: effect of cold storage and root pruning on water relations and stomatal conditioning. Physiol. Plant. 57: 210–216.Google Scholar
  7. Burdett, A. N. 1990. Physiological process in plantation establishment and the development of specifications for planting stock. Can. J. Forest Res. 20: 415–427.Google Scholar
  8. Carlson, W. C. and Miller, D. E. 1990. Target seedling root system size, hydraulic conductivity, and water use during seedling establishment, pp. 53–66. In: Rose, R., Campbell, S. J. and Landis, T. D. (Eds) Target Seedling Symposium: Proceedings, Combined Meeting of the Western Forest Nursery Associations. U.S.D.A. For. Serv. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-200.Google Scholar
  9. Eis, S. 1966. Survival and growth of white spruce wildlings and coastal nursery seedlings in the interior of British Columbia. For. Chron. 42: 346–349.Google Scholar
  10. Folk, R. S., Grossnickle, S. C. and Russel, J. H. 1995. Gas exchange, water relations and morphology of yellow-cedar seedlings and stecklings before planting and during field establishment. New Forests 9: 1–20.Google Scholar
  11. Grossnickle, S. C. 1988. Planting stress in newly planted jack pine and white spruce. 1. Factors influencing water uptake. Tree Physiology 4: 71–83.Google Scholar
  12. Grossnickle, S. C. and Heikurinen, J. 1989. Site preparation: water relations and growth of newly planted jack pine and white spruce. New Forests 3: 99–123.Google Scholar
  13. Haase, D. L. and Rose, R. 1993. Soil moisture stress induces transplant shock in stored and unstored 2+0 Douglas-fir seedlings of varying root volumes. For. Sci. 39: 275–294.Google Scholar
  14. Hunt, E. V. and Gilmore, G. 1967. Effect of initial height on loblolly pine seedling growth and survival. J. For. 65: 632–634.Google Scholar
  15. Kaushal, P. and Aussenac, G. 1989. Transplanting shock in Corsican pine and Cedar of Atlas seedlings: internal water deficits, growth and root regeneration. For. Ecol. Manage. 27: 29–40.Google Scholar
  16. Kozlowski, T. T. and Davies, W. J. 1975. Control of water balance in transplanted trees. J. of Arboriculture 1: 1–10.Google Scholar
  17. Larsen, H. S., South, D. B. and Boyer, J. N. 1986. Root growth potential, seedling morphology and bud dormancy correlate with survival of loblolly pine seedlings planted in December in Alabama. Tree Physiology 1: 253–263.Google Scholar
  18. Larsen, H. S., South, D. B. and Boyer, J. N. 1988. Foliar nitrogen content at lifting correlates with early growth of loblolly pine seedlings from 20 nurseries. South. J. Appl. For. 12: 181–185.Google Scholar
  19. McGilvray, J. and Barnett, J. P. 1982. Relating seedling morphology to field performance of containerized southern pines, pp. 39–46. In: Guldin, R. W. and Barnett, J. P. (Eds). Proc. Southern Containerized Forest Tree Seedling Conference. U.S.D.A. For. Serv. Gen. Tech. Rep. SO–37. USFSGoogle Scholar
  20. Mullin, R. E. 1963. Planting check in spruce. For. Chron. 39: 252–259.Google Scholar
  21. Mullin, R. E. 1964. Reduction in growth of white spruce after out-planting. For. Chron. 40: 488–493.Google Scholar
  22. Nambiar, E. K. S. 1984. Significance of first-order lateral roots on the growth of young radiata pine under environmental stress. Aust. For. Res. 14: 187–199.Google Scholar
  23. Rietveld, R. J. 1989. Transplanting stress in bareroot conifer seedlings: its development and progression to establishment. North. J. Appl. For. 6: 99–107.Google Scholar
  24. Sands, R. 1984. Transplanting stress in radiata pine. Aust. For. Res. 14: 67–72.Google Scholar
  25. South, D. B. and Mason, W. L. 1991. Using distribution-modifying functions to predict variation in frequency distributions of tree heights during plantation establishment. Forestry 64: 303–319.Google Scholar
  26. South, D. B. and Mason, W. L. 1993. Influence of differences in planting stock size on early height growth of Sitka spruce. Forestry 66: 83–96.Google Scholar
  27. Stoneham, J. and Thoday, P. 1985. Some physiological stresses associated with tree transplanting. Scientific Horticulture. 36: 83–91.Google Scholar
  28. Struve, D. K. and Joly, R. J. 1992. Transplanted red oak seedlings mediate transplant shock by reducing leaf surface area and altering carbon allocation. Can. J. Forest Res. 22: 1441–1448.Google Scholar
  29. Sung, S. J. S., Kormanik, P. P. and Black, C. C. 1993. Vascular cambial sucrose metabolism and growth in loblolly pine (Pinus taedaL.) in relation to transplanting stress. Tree Physiology 12: 243–258.Google Scholar
  30. Sutton, R. F. and Tinus, R.W. 1983. Root and Root System Terminology. For. Sci.Monograph 24, 134 p.Google Scholar
  31. Tuttle, C. L., South, D. B., Golden, M. S. and Meldahl, R. S. 1987. Relationship between initial seedling height and survival and growth of loblolly pine planted during a droughty year. South. J. Appl. For. 11: 139–143.Google Scholar
  32. Unterscheutz, P., Ruetz, W. F., Geppert, R. R. and Ferrell, W. K. 1974. The effect of age, pre-conditioning, and water stress on the transpiration rates of Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) seedlings of several ecotypes. Physiol. Plant. 32: 214–221.Google Scholar
  33. Vyse, A. 1981. Growth of young spruce plantations in interior British Columbia. For. Chron. 57: 174–180.Google Scholar
  34. Zeide, B. 1993. Analysis of growth equations. For. Sci. 39: 594–616.Google Scholar
  35. Zwolinski, J. B. 1992. Regeneration Procedures and Mortality of Pinus radiataD. Don in the Southern Cape Province. Ph.D. thesis. Univ. of Stellenbosch, South Africa, 257 p.Google Scholar
  36. Zwolinski, J. B., Donald, D. G. M., van Laar, A. and Groenewald, W. H. 1994. Regeneration procedures of Pinus radiatain the Southern Cape Province Part V: post planting mortality and growth of trees in response to the experimental treatments and planting site environment. S. Afr. For. J. 168: 7–12.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • David B. South
    • 1
  • Janusz B. Zwolinski
    • 2
  1. 1.Forest Regeneration Center, School of Forestry and Alabama Agricultural Experiment StationAuburn UniversityAlabamaUSA
  2. 2.Research and Development ManagerNorth East Cape ForestsPrivate Bag, UgieSouth Africa

Personalised recommendations