Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Nursery and site preparation interaction research in the United States

  • Published:
New Forests Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Researchers in the United States have generally taken a ``segregated'' approach to regeneration research. As a result, trials involving nurserytreatments are usually separated from trials involving site preparationtreatments. Researchers have concentrated on just the main treatmenteffects. Little effort has been placed on examining potential interactionsbetween nursery and site preparation treatments. Only a few nursery bysite preparation (NxSP) studies have been established. The profession hasgenerally assumed that gains from nursery and site preparation treatmentsare simply additive, or that the relative gains from nursery treatmentswould be insignificant when compared to intensive site preparationtreatments. Both of these assumptions may be incorrect.

This review examines some of the NxSP interaction trials that have beenestablished in the United States during the last half of the 20thcentury. We predict that as rotation ages for plantations decrease, the needfor NxSP interaction trials will increase. NxSP interaction studies will berequired if researchers wish to include both nursery and site preparationtreatments in their early establishment models. To date, only a fewestablishment models have been developed in the United States.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Albert, D.J., Fry, G. and Pool, B.R. 1980. An industrial company's view of nursery stock quality. New Zealand Journal of Forestry Science 10: 2–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allen, R.M. and Maki, T.E. 1955. Response of longleaf pine seedlings to soils and fertilizers. Soil Science 79: 359–362.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anonymous. 1995. Acorm User's Guide. American Cyanamid Company, Princeton, New Jersey, 16 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barber, B.L., Messina, J.S., van Buijtenen, J.P. and Wall, M.M. 1991. Influence of nursery fertilization, site quality, and weed control on first-year performance of outplanted loblolly pine. pp. 27–37. In: Coleman, Sandra S. and Neary, Daniel G. (Eds.) Proceedings of the Sixth Biennial Southern Silvicultural Research Conference. October 30–November 1, 1990, Memphis, TN. USDA For. Serv. Gen. Tech. Rep. SE-70.

  • Brand, D.G. 1991. Biological and economic productivity of Canadian silvicultural regimes. pp. 324–332. In: Menzies, M.I., Parrott, G.E. and Whitehouse, L.J. (Eds.) Efficiency of Stand Establishment Operations. NZ Forest Research Institute. FRI Bulletin 156.

  • Dorman, K.W. and Sims, I.H. 1949. Loblolly pine bibliography. USDA Forest Service Southeastern Forest Experiment Station. Station Paper No. 6. 65 pp.

  • Grossnickle, S.C. and Reid, C.P.P. 1982. The use of ecotomycorrhizal conifer seedlings in the revegetation of a high-elevation mine site. Can. J. For. Res. 12: 354–361.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hatcher, J.B. 1957. Prescription planting. Forest Farmer June: 4–6.

  • Hitch, K.L., Shiver, B.D. and Borders, B.E. 1996. Mortality models for newly regenerated loblolly pine plantations in the Georgia Piedmont. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry 20: 197–202.

    Google Scholar 

  • Irwin, K.M., Duryea, M.L. and Stone, E.L. 1998. Fall-applied nitrogen improves performance of 1-0 slash pine nursery seedlings after outplanting. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry 22: 111–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, P.S. 1984. Responses of planted northern red oak to three overstory treatments. Can. J. For. Res. 14: 536–542.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johansen, R.W. 1955. The effects of certain nursery treatments and site preparations on the vigor and survival of longleaf pine (Pinus palustris Mill.) in the deep sands of the Carolinas. M.S. thesis. North Caroina State College, School of Forestry. 46 pp.

  • Kimmins, J.P. 1989. Ecological implications of successional manipulation. pp. 9–16. In: Schivener, B.A. and MacKinnon, J.A. (Eds.) Learning from the Past, Looking into the Future. B.C. Ministry of Forests. FRDA report 030.

  • Land, S.B. 1983. Performance and G-E interactions of sycamore established from cuttings and seedlings. pp. 431–440. In: Jones, Earle P. (Ed.) Proceedings of the Second Biennial Southern Silvicultural Research Conference. November 4–5, 1982, Atlanta, GA. USDA For. Serv. Gen. Tech. Rep. SE-24.

  • McDonald, P.M., Mori, S.R. and Fiddle, G.O. 1999. Effect of competition on genetically improved ponderosa pine seedlings. Can. J. For. Res. 29: 940–946.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKeand, S.E., Crook, R.P. and Allen, H.L. 1997. Genotypic stability effects on predicted family responses to silvicultural treatments in loblolly pine. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry 21: 84–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, R.J., Zutter, B.R. and South, D.B. 1988. Interaction between weed control and loblolly pine, Pinus taeda, seedling quality. Weed Technology 2: 191–195.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moulton, R.J. 1999. Tree planting in the United States – 1997. Tree Planters' Notes 49: 1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Park, Y.S., Gerhold, H.D. and Palpant, E.H. 1973. Genotype × environment interactions of Douglas-fir provenances in Pennsylvania nurseries. School of Forest Resources, Pennsylvania State University, Research Briefs 7(2): 14–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Payandeh, B. 1996. Growth and survival functions for three planted species in northern Ontario. North. J. Appl. For. 13: 19–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Payandeh, B., Punch, M. and Basham, D. 1992. User's manual for “Plant-PC”: a model for forest plantation establishment in Ontario. For. Can., Ont. Region, Sault Ste. Marie, Ont. COFRDA Rep. 3319. 46 p.

  • Pitt, D.G., Krishka, C.S., Bell, F.W. and Lehela, A. 1999. Five-year performance of three conifer stock types on fine sandy loam soils treated with hexazinone. North. J. of Applied Forestry 16: 72–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Powers, H.R. and Rowan, S.J. 1983. Influence of fertilization and ectomycorrhizae on loblolly pine growth and susceptibility to fusiform rust. South. J. Appl. For. 7: 101–103.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rose, R. and Ketchum, S. 1999. Vegetation Management Research Cooperative. 1998–1999 Annual Report. Forest Research Laboratory, Oregon State University, College of Forestry, Corvallis, Oregon 39 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shipman, R.D. 1958. Planting pine in the Carolina Sandhills. USDA Forest Services Southeastern Forest Experiment Station. Station Paper No. 96. 43 pp.

  • Snyder E.B. and Allen, R.M. 1963. Sampling, nursery, and year-replication effects in a longleaf pine progeny test. pp. 26–27. In: Proceedings of a Forest Genetics Workshop. Southern Forest Tree Improvement Committee. Publication No. 22. Macon, GA.

  • South, D.B. 1996. Top-pruning bareroot hardwoods: a review of the literature. Tree Planters' Notes 47: 34–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • South, D.B. 1998. Needle-clipping longleaf pine and top-pruning loblolly pine in bareroot nurseries. South. J. Appl. For 22: 235–240.

    Google Scholar 

  • South, D.B. and Mitchell, R.J. 1999. Determining the “optimum” slash pine seedling size for use with four levels of vegetation management on a flatwoods site in Georgia, U.S.A. Can. J. For. Res. 29: 1039–1046.

    Google Scholar 

  • South, D.B., Mitchell, R.J., Zutter, B.R., Balneaves, J.M., Barber, B.L., Nelson, D.G. and Zwolinski, J.B. 1993. Integration of nursery practices and vegetation management: Economic and biological potential for improving regeneration. Can. J. For. Res. 23: 2083–2092.

    Google Scholar 

  • South, D.B., Zwolinski, J.B. and Allen, H.L. 1995. Economic returns from enhancing loblolly pine establishment on two upland sites: Effects of seedling grade, fertilization, hexazinone, and intensive soil cultivation. New For. 10: 239–256.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stein, W.I. 1984. The coastal reforestation systems study – five year results. USDA For. Serv., Pac. Northwest For. Range. Exp. Sta., Portland, OR. Res. Prog. Rep. 10 p.

  • Sutherland, D.C. and Day, R.J. 1988. Container volume affects survival and growth of white spruce, black spruce, and jack pine seedlings: A literature review. N. J. Appl. For. 5: 185–189.

    Google Scholar 

  • Todd, A.M.D. 1989. Stock types for planting – what's available, what's required. pp. 24–32. In: Schivener, B.A. and MacKinnon, J.A. (Eds.) Learning from the Past, Looking into the Future. B.C. Ministry of Forests. FRDA report 030.

  • Toumey, J.W. 1916. Seeding and Planting. John Wiley and Sons, Inc. New York. 455 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vardaman, J.M. 1998. The Vardaman 1998 seminar and the 1998 hypothesis. Vardaman's Green Sheet October 15: 1–2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wakeley, P.C. 1954. Planting the southern pines. USDA Agric. Monograph 18. 233 pp.

  • Wakeley, P.C. 1963. Reducing the effects of nursery influences upon provenance tests. pp. 28–32. In: Proceedings of a Forest Genetics Workshop. Southern Forest Tree Improvement Committee. Publication No. 22. Macon, GA.

  • Ward, J.S. 1997. Influence of initial seedling size and browse protection on height growth: 5-year results. pp. 127–134. In: Landis, T.D., South, D.B. (Eds.) Tech. Coords. National Proceedings, Forest and Conservation Nursery Associations. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-389.

  • Wood, J.E. 1990. Black spruce and jack pine plantation performance in boreal Ontario: 10 year results. N. J. of Appl. For. 7: 175–179.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Forestry and Wildlife Sciences and Alabama Agricultural Experiment Station, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, 36849-5418, USA

    David B. South & Ken L. McNabb

  2. Department of Forest Science, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR

    Robin W. Rose

Authors
  1. David B. South
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Robin W. Rose
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ken L. McNabb
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

South, D.B., Rose, R.W. & McNabb, K.L. Nursery and site preparation interaction research in the United States. New Forests 22, 43–58 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012079014625

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012079014625

Search

Navigation