A Guide 

to 

Southern Pine Seed Sources 

Clark W. Lantz 

Xursery~Tree Improvement Specialist 

USDA Forest Service, Southern Region 

Atlanta, Georgia 

John F. Kraus, Plant Geneticist (Retired) 

USDA Forest Service 

Southeastern Forest Experiment Station 

Macon, Georgia 

Southeastern Forest Experiment Station 

Asheville, North Carolina 

1987 
Acknowledgment 

The authors thank Ozzie 8, %'ells aT the Southel--n Forest Experiment Stacfcn for his many ciiniributiuns t~ this publication. Ozzie was ori$raaliy 

a c:oauthor but decider3 to retire in January 19%. He provider1 much of the 

fclxt and many refere~~ces for this publication before his retirement. 

The team of Philip C* kVakeley and Wells domirtated the literature on geographic variation of the southern pines for many years. Together and 

separately, \Yakelex and x&reiis made an outstanding cont~bution to southern forestry, They provided the basic foundation of geogaphic variation 

upon which all of the effective southern forest tree improvement prnprams have been built, Their well-written laubiications with effective 

i.ummarfes of large amounts of data have been instrumental in the increased productivity of souther11 forests. 

After the death of Wakeley in 1983, Wells carried on this tradition of outheanding publications, Ail of us in southern forestry ~eatly appreciate 

the fine work of Phil FVakeley and Ozaie FJJefls. 
Contents 

Introduction ......................... .... ....‘....* 1 

Gene Consemation .................................. 2 

Select the Best Species for Your Site ...................... 3 

Physiographic Regions of the South 

Genetic Improvement of the Southern Pines ................ 4 

Movement of Seed-Orchard Seeds and Seedlings ............. 6 

State Forestry Organizations .......................... ? 

Fusiform Rust ..................................... 7 

Seed and Seedling Certification ......................... 8 

Southern Pines 

Species ......................................... 9 

Hybrids ......................................... 9 

Loblolly Pine 

Geographic Variation ............................... 10 

Genetic Improvement *.................. ... ........* 11 

Recommended Planting Zones ......................... 11 

Specific Problems .................... ... .. .. ...... I6 

Slash Pine 

Geogaphic Variation ............................... 4-7 

Genetic Improvement ............................... 19 

Recommended Planting Zones ......................... 19 

Specific Problems ................................. 20 

Longleaf Pine 

Geographic Variation ............................... 21 

Genetic Improvement ............................... 22 

Recommended Planting Zones ......................... 22 

Virginia Pine 

Geopaphic Variation ............................... 23 

Genetic Improvement ............................... 23 

Recommended Plaliting Zones ......................... 2-1 

Shortleaf Pine 

Geoqaphic Variation ............................... 25 

Genetic Improvemeurt ............................... 25 

Recommended Planting Zones ......................... 25 

Speeigc Problems ............................... .. 26 
Sand Pine 

Ceo~apbie Variation ............................... 26 

Genetic Improvemellt ............................... 27 

Recommended Planting Zones ......................... 27 

References ....................................... 30 
ABSTRACT 

The selection of an appropriate seed source is critical for successful southern pine plantations. Guides for selection of seed 

sources are presented for loblolly, slash, longleaf. Virginia, 

shortleaf, and sand pines. Separate recommendations are given for 

areas where fusiform-rust hazard is high. 

KEUtVORDS: Planting zones, provenance tests, geographic 

variation, Pinars taeda, Pinus elliottiz, Pznus paE?~stris, Pinus 

ui?y iniana , Pinus echinnta, Pinus clausa. 

Introduction 

Establishing a forest plantation is bard and it is expensive. Seedlings must be bought, and vegetation that may compete with the young 

trees should be controlled. The seedlings must be eared for before they are 

planted, and they must be placed in the ground carefully, one at a time. 

Finally, the plantation must be protected as it develops. The cost of the 

seedlings is only a small part of the total. Yet a poor choice of planting 

stock frequently reduces the productivity of plantations and sometimes 

causes outright failures. 
Of course, the proper species must be chosen for the planting site. But 

the choices do not end there. Among southern pines, tho most commonly 

planted species in the Southe1-n United States, it is also impori-tant to use 

the best seed source. If you are planting in coastal South Carolina, are you 

better off with platlting stock from local, Vir@nia, or Louisiana seeds? 

This publication is desieed to help you make these critical choices. 

Does the seed source make all that much difirence? It certainly does. 

Many years of scientific study show that the seed source can strongly affect survival and subsequent gowth of southern pines. Perhaps the most 

important early study of pine seed sources was Philip C. JYakeley's 

Bogatusa, LA, planting of 1927. There, loblolly pines (Pinus taeda L.) 

grown from local seeds produced about twice the wood volume through 

age 22 as did trees of the same species grown from Arkansas, Georgia. and 

Texas seeds. Since Wakeley's pioneering study, a great deal has been 

learned about geographic va~ation in southern pines. The Southwide Pine 

Seed Source Study was a cooperative effort initiated in 1951 by the Southern Forest Tree Improvement Committee. Federal, State, university, and 

industry foresters throughout the South worked together to discover the 

patterns of geographic vax-iation in the southern pines. The results of this 

work are summarized in publications by Dorman (19761, Wakeley (1961), 

Wells (1969, 19831, and Wells and Wakeley (1966). 

These studies show that most southern pine species have reacted to 

differences in environmental conditions by developing different traits in 

different places through the process of natural selection. Therefore, there 

are races (ecotypes) of southern pines that grow faster in certain areas 

than in others. Some of these races are more resistant to disease or more 

tolerant of cold than other pines of the same species. The recognition of 

these patterns of geographic variation was the first step in the process 

of genetic improvement of the southern pines. All successful southern pine 

breeding programs are built on this foundation of geographic variation. 

Important gains in growth and disease resistance can often be made simply by selecting the best seed source for a given planting location. With 

some species, additional gains can be had by using the improved stock 

coming from tree breeding programs. 

Planting seedlings from a seed source that is poorly adapted to your 

site can cause devastating losses. Even if the trees survive, their reduced 

growth will adversely affect yields throughout the timber rotation. It is 

better to postpone planting for a year rather than to risk the unfortunate 

results of planting ill-adapted seedlings. 

Gene Gomasemation 

Much has been \\~tten in recent years about eonservatlon of gene pools 

in breeding programs. Forests in the South contain a rich gene pool that 

is not likely to be depleted by tree breedilig. In fact, the moving of pol- 
len and seeds great dis"ianees for breeding and plan-terip encourages nexa 

genetic combinations that sq ere previously e;nknown. 

Tl-ee improvement prosarns utilize gcnes ar,d gene ccorr\plc~,.;es tkat arc 

only a small sample of the entire gene pool, These pro&m-iems esnserr e penetic resoun-ces in clone banks, seed orchards, and genetic tests, In 

addition, these propams often ereate new* genetic vaY.zabiiit~- \airhen trees 

from widely separated areas are inter-mated and them cffspring ax-s utilized for reforestation. 

Substantial areas of southern forests are regenerated by natural 

methods. These areas will preserve much of the natural gene pool or" the 

forest species of the South. 

We recommend that all southern forestry organizaQons establish the 

following programs to encourage the preservation of the existing southern gene pool and to assure a wide genetic diversity for the future: 

e Promote the use of genetically sound practices for both ar"ci%"?ciaiiy and 

naturally regenerated forest stands. 

t, Discourage dysgenie practices such as high-grading and diameter-limit 

logging. 

o Encourage land owners to: 

a. Leave only the highest quality seed trees when natural regeneration is used. 

b. Leave an adequate number of seed trees which will add to the dlversity of the gene pool, 

lnfonn the public about the risks of planting poorly adapted seedlings 

or seeds. 

a, Continually evaluate the status of minor, threatened, and endangered 

forest species. Establish natural areas for the preservation of these 

species. Plant these species whenever suihable sites are available. 

Select the Best Species for Your Site 

Wen a site is to be regenerated, the choice of species is often the most 

critical decision to be made. If there are abundant, healthy, fast-poxjng 

trees on the site, probably the safe choice is to replant the same species, 

However, if there are no trees, or only a few trees which are slowgo~ng, poorly fo~med, and obviously not well suited to the site, another 

species or possibly another seed source of the sarne specles should be 

considered. A common mistake is to use a single speetes over a large area 

~thout conside~lng the variation in site quaiity within the area (Balmer 

and 71Villiston 1974). The best indicator for a padieular ske is a healthy, 
vigorous plantation growing on a similar site. Good su~avival and grovi;-th 

through at least one-half of the rotation usually is a reliable predictor of 

success. 

Other important considerations are the product desired, and nontimber 

considerations such as hunting or grazing, and local fire and disease 

hazards. 

The following checklist may be helpful in choosing a species: 

e Are there pines growing locally? 

Are these trees healthy and fast grorving? 

e What products are desired? 

Will the land be hunted or grazed? 

e Are there local disease hazards such as fusiform rust? 

Is the land vulnerable to wildfire or arson? 

Is the land subject to flooding or extreme drought? 

Is the area likely to have ice storms? 

Careful consideration of these questions should expedite the selection of 

the best species to plant. Additional information on species selection can 

be found in Balmer and Williston (1974) and Dorman (1976). 

Physiographic Regions 

of the South 

Conditions for tree growth vary greatly over the South due to differences in geology, elevation, soils, climate, and competing vegetation. Figure 1 shows the major physiographic regions of the South. Within these 

physiographic regions, southern pines have evolved into distinct species, 

races, and ecotypes. 

Genetic Improvement 

of the Southern Pines 

Seed orchards have been established to supply genetically improved 

seeds for certain physiographic provinces or geographic areas. For 

example, the Georgia Forestry Commission established the Arrowhead 

Seed Orchard from trees selected within natural stands and plantations 

growing on the coastal plain of Georgia. The seeds collected from this orchard are used to raise seedlings for planting on coastal plain sites in 
Figune I.-Physiographic provinces of the Youth 

(Adapted from Nelson and Zillgitt 1969.) 

Georgja. These seedlings may not perform well on piedanonmr mountain 

sites, Until the seedlings are actually tested on these other sites, it is impossible to predict how well they will survive and grow there. For this 

reason, itis importantto carefUlly match all seed sources \vi.it)l the planting site, A genetically impr-oved seediing i* of: no value if it dies or will not 

pow because it is mot adapted to the planting site, 

A tree is selected for seed o~*chiard use on the basis of its pperfomance 

in ccimpetitiian with ids neighbcrs on ;L specific site for a specific period of 

time. Although the majority of these sires are coastai plain sites, some 

may not be "typical*' coastal ];lain sites, If a sufEeiently iargc number of 

trees is ssed to establish the crchhrd, a far ~~OUTIC cf site variation is 

saapled in the selectiora procesa, As a res~iit, natural cross pollination 

withkrn the orehard wili create marly new genotypes that should be 

adapted to a wide range of sites, 

Priagcn~ testa are disigned to 1 stimaie Gkic breeding = alue of the sciected trees, %%en the pr9geazy of cc~?i--t;trr st leetions do nstperfor-re~ well: 

on the "tht sitrb, the grafts of those sciiectio:-,s wril be rigued iren~~ved.) 

"iom thc crchard, If Plze test slctes are a good i-epn-esentatiur, of regeneration sites, the progeny test rf-rli weed eilt mo?% of the pooriy rdaptecl 

hrniiies. 
men the progeny of a select tree perfilm well on one site but poorly 

on another site, compared with other seedlings, there is a genotype x 

environment interaction. Since these genotype x environment interactions 

have usually been small in most southern pine progeny testss, it appears 

that first-generation seed orebards are producing trees with a wide range 

of adaptability. 

~Wovement of Seed-Orchard Seeds 

and Seedlings 

Moving seecfs or seedlings to a region where they have not been tested 

involves some degree of risk. This is true for seedlings from seed orchard 

seeds as well as from woods-run seeds. Drought, ice, or extreme cold can 

be devastating to trees from seed lots that are not adapted to that specific hazard. The decision to plant fast-gro~ng seedlings, which may not 

be adapted to local hazards, should be based on a comparison of the potential gain in wood production with the risk of loss from extreme weather, 

pathogens, or unusual gowing conditions. 

Figure 2.-Areas of major cornmerelai use of nodocal loblolly pine seedlings (Kraus and others 1984). 

Coastal North Carolina seeds used in Arkansas Oklahoma (A) for increased gowth rate. Livingston 

Parish, Louisiana. seeds used from hfississippi to 

South Carolina iBj for increased rust resistance, 
Some organizations have elected to accept some risk in the belief chat 

the additional wood produced by fast-pot~ng sources will outx~eigh the 

possible loss. Weyerhaeuser's planting of North Groiina coastal loblolly 

seed orchard seedlings in Oklahoma and Arkansas has been very successful for several years (Lambeth and others 1984) (fig 22). Seed source studies have also indicated a 10- to 12-foot height advantage of South Carolina coastal loblolly seedlings over an Oklahon~a source after 25 years in a 

south kkansas plantation (m'ells and Lambeth 19B). Similar gains have 

been reported with other Atlantic coastal loblolly sources (Lantz and 

Hofmann 1969; Wells and Svvitzer 1971). Likewise Livingston Parish loblolly seedlings have been planted over hundreds of thousands of acres in 

the southern coastal plain (fig. 2). They have exhibited substantial rust 

resistance while maintaining good powth rates (Wells 1985). 

The decision to plant seeds or seedlings which are not native to a given 

area always involves some degree of risk. Even long-standing exotic plantation programs encounter new hazards; for example, Dothistro~na needle blight in Pinus radiata plantings in Brazil, South Africa, and New 

Zealand (Zobel and Talbert 1984). However, new pathogens or disastrous 

weather patterns can also affect native stands. Witness the owing concern over pitch canker in the South or the frequent humicane damage on 

the coast of the Gulf of &Iexico. 

State li'orestq Organizations 

Because of their diverse clientele, State forestry organizations must 

take a more conservative approach to seed sources than forest industq. 

Few nonindustrial private forest landowners have the knowledge to make 

sound decisions about the best sources to plant on their own land. Indeed, 

far too few service foresters are in a position to offer well-founded advice on this question, For this reason, most State nursery proearns provide seedlings from local sources. Recently, however, a number of Southern States have grown loblolly seedlings from Livingston Parish, 

Louisiana, seed because of their good fusiform-rust resistance and fast 

growth. 

Seedlings from Southern State seed orchards can be expected to have 

significantly improved bole straightness and branching eharactenistics, with 

moderately improved gowth rates. Seedlings from mst-resistant seed orchards should have greater resistance do fusifom rust than nursery-nln 

seedlings with no reduction an pou-tk rates or wood quality, 

ZFsrsif"srm Rust 

In areas of high rust hazard, lando'livners and foresters often must 

choose between unimproved seedlings ~9th some natural resistance to fusiform rust and susceptible but faster growing seed-orchard seedlings. 

First-generation seed orchards are now producing enough seeds to satisfy most planting requirements throughout the South, but the rust- 
resistant orchards are sex-era1 years horn ftaffiiling demand. The decision 

to use seedlings from rust-suscep"tible orchard seeds that have been genetically improved for growth rate and form or to use seedlings from un-irnproved bilt resistant wild seeds (e.g,, Livi~~gstors Parish or east Texas 

loblolly) is dil'ficu!t. Ideally, it shorild be made by integrating several 

factors: degree of improvement in traits other than resistance expected 

from orchard seeds, degree of improvement expected in resisbance from 

wild seeds, and the hazard rating of the area do be planted, Research 

aimed at quantifying this decision is now underway. A growth and yield 

model incorpora"ting fu'usiform rust will be used in this effort (Nance and 

others 1983). 

Seed and Seedling Cedifieation 

Certification programs are desiped to identify and control the quality 

of forest tree seeds and seedlings (Barber 1975), With the exceptions of 

Oklahoma, Tennessee, and Virginis, all the Southern States in which ioblolly pine is a major species have laws to certify forest tree seeds. Under these laws, certification can be obtained for seeds ori@nating in natural stands, seed production areas, or seed orchards. In some cases, the 

expected amount of improvement in growth and disease resistance from 

seed-orchard seeds is ineluded in the certification. 

Certified seeds mst also meet established standards of purityp percemttage of filled seed, and gemination, These requirements protect the buyer 

and encourage the seller to offer only seeds of known origin ancl quality, 

In most States, three levels of seed certification are available: 

I. Source-Identified Seeds (Yellow Tag). These seeds may "64 from natural stands, plantations of known provenance, or seed production areas of 

known geographic origin. Only the geographic loeation is cedified. 

2. Selected Tree Seeds (Green Tag). Selected tree seeds are frown untested but rigidly selectecl trees or stands that have potential, but not 

proof, of genetie superiority, 

3. Certified Tree Seeds (Blue Tag). These are seeds from trees of 

proven genetic superiority, produced so as to assure genetic identity. At 

present, these seeds are usually from seed orchards in the selected 

trees have been progen? tested and the poorest trees removed on the hasis of the test results. 

The intematio~ta! cel-tificatiora of forest reprodu~ti~e material is gsverned by the Organization foe- Eeonornie Cooperation and Deve~opment 

(OECD) (Rudolf 197'41. 
Southern Pines 

Species 

This section pro~ides speeifie information on seed sources for the southern pine species that are commonly used in forest plantations: loblolly, 

slash (Bin us clliottii Engelm. ). longleaf (6". paiustgs Mill.), Yirginia (P. 

t~irgininnca, Mill.), shortleaf (P. echinata Mill.), and sand pines (P. elausa 

ICbapm, ex Engelm.)) 'C'asey ex Sarg, Additional infomation on pitch 

pine (P. riglda Xill.), pond pine (P. serolina Michx.), spruce pine (P, 

glab?-a Walt.), and Tabbe Mountain pine (B. pungens Lamb.) can be 

found in Dsrman (1976). 

Southern pine species vary widely in natut-a1 range, economic value, and 

degree of genetic improvement. In this section, we describe the natural 

range, geographic variation, genetic improvement, and recommended 

planting zones for the species mentioned. 

It must be emphasized that local site conditions such as soils, slope, 

and competing vegetation must be carefully considered in any site analysis. 

These planting zone recommendatiorts are bzzsed or; the m;t;;ou.ity of site 

within the zone, but Local exceptions will occur. 

Literature citations indicate sources of more detailed infomation. 

The southern pine species often hybridize in meas different species occupy the same sites. Tho most common natural hybrids are Sonderregger pine (longleaf x loblolly) (Chapman 1922), loblolly x shortleaf 

pine (Zobel 1953): and loblolly x pond pine (Saylor and Kang 1953). 

The piteh x Ioblolly pine hybrid has been produced artificially in Korea for many years (Wwn 1970) and is cmently planted on cold, dry sites 

on the Cumberland Plateau (Little and Trew 1976). 

Recent work in the South has indicated that shortleaf x slash pine hybrids often outpaw the parental species (Wells and others 1978). Research 

with Iobfnlly x shoi-tleaf pine hybrids indicates the potential for improved 

fusifcrrm-rust resistance, when compared with the parental species (La 

Farge and Kraus 1980). 

The successful planting of hybrids requires a very careful site analysis. 

Both the pitch :d loblolly hybrid and the shortleaf x loblolly hybrid will perform \+?ell when the planting sites are properly selected. Additional information on southern pine hybrids may be found in Dorman (1976). 
Loblolly Pine 

Lobloiiy pine is the most important southern pine. It produces over 

half of the total southern pine wood volume (Dorman 19761, and it aecounts for about 80 percent of all southern pine seedling production in 

the Vnited Shates. Because of lobloily pine's importance, its breeding and 

planting programs are the largest in the world. 

Within its natural range, which extends from southern Hem- Jersey to 

southeast Texas (fig. 31, loblolly pine oecupies a great diversity of sites. It 

grows faster than any of the other southern pines on well-drained productive sites. It is not the best choice, however, on very dry sands or on 

wet flatwoods sites. 

Geographic Va?.-iation 

Geographic variation in loblolly pine has been well documented for 

growth rate, disease resistance, cold tolerance, and drought resistance 

( Dorrnan 1976). Eastern coastal sourees are usual1 y faster growing and 

more susceptible to fusiform rust than are u-estern sources. On the other 

hand, lobiolly sourees from west of the Mississippi River are usually 

more drought resistant than eastern sources (Wells 1985). 

Loblolly seedlings from Li~ringston Parish, Louisiana, have been widely 

planted on coastal plain sites throughout the South due to their fast 

growth and good resistance to fusiforrn rust. Because they are highly 
susceptible to ice damage, however, these seedlings should not be 

plat~ted too far north. [See discussidn under Fusiform Rust.) 

Genetic improvement of lohlolly pine started in the mid-1950% with the 

establishment of seed production areas and seed orchards. Seed production areas were high-quality natural stands thinned to the best 10 to 20 

trees per acre and managed for cone proctuction. Although the genetic 

gain calculated from. seed production areas was small (Easley 1963), they 

were convenient sources of seeds from above-average trees in known geographic areas. 

Seed orchards of loblolly pine were established primarily by grafting. 

The parent trees were selected for fast growth, good form, high-quality 

wood, and freedom from insect and disease symptoms. Progeny tests indicate a gain of from 10 to 20 percent in volume and up to 32 percent in 

value for first-generation progeny compared with unimproved nursery-run 

seedlings (Talbert and others 1985). 

Some loblolly pine seeds from first-generation seed orchards are currently available on the open market. 

Figure 4.-Lobloliy pine planting zones. 

Recommezzded Planting Zones 

Loblolly pine planting zones have been located in the South based on 

topo~aphy, climate, soils, vegetation, and (of greatest importance) plantation performance. These planting zones are shown in figure 4. The 
recommended seed sources for each zone are presenred on the pages that 

follornv. Reeomme~dations are surnntarized in table 1, 

Zone 1-Yirginia, lf seeds fm;n a local seed orehard or seed prodiiction area are not availaloie, seeds shut~ld be collected from local stands 

with above-average stem form and gowth, Fixere seeds from a heal stand 

are not available, movement of seeds a shor% distance to the north would 

probably be more advantageous than moving seeds south. For example, 

seeds fx-on1 southern Virgkia v;-ouid probably perhrrn PA-efi in 3laryiand 

and Gteiaxvare, but these seeds u~sulcl not be a good choice for North 

Carolina. When local seeds are not available, the most conservative approach wou!d be to use seeds from the North Carolina eoastal plain in the 

coastal plain of %'ir@nia. &ike?$~ise, Ko&h Carolina piedmont seed should 

be used in the piedmont of Virgnia, 

Zone =?-Coastal Plain: North Carolina, In the coastal plain of 

North Carolina (fig. 4, zone 2), local seed sources should be favored. 

These coastal sources &om the Carolinas have been consistently fast growing in tests on a wide range of sites in the South (Lantz and Hofmann 

1969; %'ells and Swltzer 19'71). There may be some slight growth advantage to moving seeds north from South Carolina into North Carolina. 

Hobvever, due to the generally colder climate in the piedmont of these 

States, and the increased fr'requeney of ice and snow, it is not reeornmended that eoastal plain sources of lobloily pine be moved into the pledmont (Jones and Fells 1969). Korthern pieciimont sources of loblolly have 

gros-n well, however, for up to 8 years in the northern coastal plain 

(Talbert and Weir 1979). 

Zone 3----Piedmont: North Carolina to North Mississippi, The 

northern portions of Mississippi, Alabama, and GeorHa and the piedmont 

areas of South Carolil~a and Xorth Carolina (fig. 4+ zone 3; make up another area of relatively unifosrn climate, In the absence of irnprovecl local 

sources of loblolly pine, movement of seeds either east dr west wthin 

this region should produce aeeeptabie 

Zone &Coastal Plain: South Carolina to 3Iklississiippi, The area 

extending from Louisiana east of the Mississippi River through the 

coastal plain of Mississippi, Alabama, north Flcrida, Georgia, and South 

Carolina is climatically hsmcge~~eous (fig, 4, zofie 41, Fusiform rust is 

most prevalent in this area. and in some local "hot spots" aalnlost totally 

destructive. If seeds or seedlings of irnprosred strains of iobiolly pine ~715th 

proven disease resistance arc notavailable, the best natural seed source 

for this area is Livingston Parish, Louisiana. EastTexas loblolly has also 

been used successfully on high-rust-hazard sites, but this source is USUally slower growing than Livingston Parish loblolly, (See Specific Problems - F'u~iform Rust.) 

Zone 5-East Texas to West Louisiana. West of the Mississippi 

River, in Louisiana and southeast Texas (fig. 3, zone 31, dl;@al seecl 

sources have Gown we-ell. They are consistently more drought ha~*c-'r\; than 
sources from east of the river and survive weihfter planting. Eastern 

sources of lob loll^ have suffer-eci heal-p mortality when pianted in this zone 

(Long 1980)- 

Zone &South Arkansas Is Southeast Oklahoma, Several longterm1 tests have shown that "lohlolly pine fro111 east of the 3Iississippi River 

bas, inherentl~r, a faster porn-thrrate than western IobIoIIy. Trees frorn 

some eastern sources have grown about 8 feet raller than western trees 

in 25 years-a subsbandial difference iWells and Lambeth 1963). In the 

last few gears some forest products manufacturers with land in southern 

Arkansas, southeastern Oklahoma, and the Ouaehita Mountains of Arkansas and Oklahoma have planted substantial numbers of loblolay seedlings 

frorn Atlantic Coastal Plain sol;rces CLambeth and others 1964). 

Such seed source movement entails a eedain aencunt of risk; just how 

much is not eet-tain, In the long-term tests mentioned above. eer%ain eastern sources suffered heavy mot-taiity at about age 20. Damage was greatest among sources from the mildest climates; i.e., near the gulf and AtIantic coasts in Flo;"ida, but a few other sources, distgbuted at random east 

of the Mississippi River, were also hard hit. Damage was thought to be 

due to very high stand densities in the fast-vowing coastal sources, in 

conjunction tvith bark beetle attack iWells hnd Larnbeth 1983)- Local Arkansas and Oklahoma sources were not damaged. It is hoped that Atlantic coast sources of lobfolly can be successfully gown ir-r Arkansas ar,d 

Oklahoma if they are rest~cted to the better sites and if stands are kept 

thrifty by juclicious thinning, 

All factors considered, the use sf lnbloliy from the Atlantic Coastal Plain 

is probably not a viable strate= for most small private Ismdowners west 

of the Xississippi River. It requires the ability do earefulthlly assess the geographic location and site quality, the resources and long-term eom~til-ruity 

to carry out thlnnings when necessary, and the capacity to absorb losses, 

Also, small pvivate landot\~ners would have to make special arrangements 

to obtain seeds and to produce seedlings. The State nurseries in Arkansas, 

Oklahoma, Louisiana. and Texas produce only seedlings of local origin, 

Therefore, only large forest-products industr-ies have the facilities to take 

advantage of this technoloa at present. 

Zone 7-Western Tennessee, Western Kentucky, Southern IHinois. \Vestern Kentucky and. western Tennessee often experience severe 

cold, Lobloily is not raative to this area, but Barbour (4980) has done extensive testing of loblolly seed sources in this area. Lshiolly seeds f~-i)rn northern &lississippi, northel-n Alabama, and -iats;-"khw-estern Georgia have performed much better than other suur*cr.s. Sources from <-astern Virginia, 

northern Noa%h Carolina, and central Arkansas ha% e airo perS~~med \veil, 

In sou"claern Illinois, Gi'irnos-e (1980) founci lobIo14y from southwestern 

Arkansas and &l;fav"iarad to be the only sources tested \\-hi& were resistant to cold and ice damage. 

&Coastal Plain: 

South Carolina to 

Mississippi ............. 

1. Improved sources with proven fusiform- Sandhills sites: Careful site 

rust resistance analysis required. Longleaf, 

Choctawhatchee sand pin€., or 

Texas drought-harcly loblolly may be 

suitable 

2. Livingston Parish (see Fusiform Rust High fusiform-rust-hazard sites: 

section) TJse fusiform-mst-resistant seed 

orchard or Livingston Parish (see 

Fusiforni Rust seetion) 

&East Texas to west 

Louisiana ...................... 1. East Texas sources 

&--South Arkansas to Atlantic coastal sources from Zone 2 

southeast Oklahoma ............... have produced goad growth on the 

better sites on short rotations, but 

the risk of loss is substantial (see 

discussion under Zone 6) 

7-Western Tennessee, 

western Kentucky, 

southern Illinois 

1. North Mississippi, north Alabama, 

or northwest Georgia 

2. Central Arkansas 

3. Eastern Virginia, northeastern 

North Carolina, or the eastern 

shore of Virginia and Maryland 

Dry sites: clrought-hardy source 

from Texas Forest Service 

Dry sites: Local seed orchards or 

seed-production areas. Shortleaf 

shoulcf be planted on dry ridge 

sites or at higher elevations 
Specvie Prob Eems 

Fusiform Rust. &lost loblolly pine sources from west of the Mississippi River and from the northeastern extremity of the range (Maryland 

and Virginia) are classed as strongly resistant to fusiform rust. Livingston Parish, Louisiana, and east Texas sources are moderately resistant, 

and all the rest of the loblolly population east of the Mississippi River is 

susceptible. Most western sources are slower growing than sources from 

the same latitude east of the Mississippi River, however, and the northeastern sources are relatively slow gowing when brought south to areas 

of high rust hazard. 

Livingston Parish is the only geogz-apbic source with high rust resistance that grouTs as fast as the generally susceptible Ioblollly populations 

from the gulf and Atlantic coasts. It is sensitive to cold, hovc~ever, and 

should not be moved north farther "can the limits shown in figure 5. Livingston Parish seedlings have exhibited poor form north of this line in 

both Geor@-ia (Wells 1985) and Arkansas iFVells and Lambeth 1983). 

For planting sites with a high rust hazarcl, iobloily seed sources should 

be considel-ed in the foHlnwing order: 

1. Seeds from a seed orehard established specifically fur resistance to 

rust. 
2. Seeds from a progeny-tested ancf rogued seed orchacf, in which the 

tests illeluded a high-rust-hazard site. 

3. Seeds f om a progeny-testctcl seed orchard in which the tests included 

a high-rust-hazard site. 

4. Unimproved seeds from Livingston Parish or east Texas. 

5. Untested seed-orchard seeds. 

6. Local woods-run seeds. 

Dry Sites. Sandhills sites are a real challenge for reforestation. Often 

the key to success is the correct analysis of the site followed by the correct choice of species and seed source. Among the choices are longleaf pine 

(Denniligton and Farrar 19831, Choctawhatchee sand pine (Outcalt and 

Brendemuehl 1985), and drought-hardy loblolly pine from Texas. 

Carolina sandhills sites have traditionally been planted with either slash 

or- lo~lgleaf pine. The slash pines usualjy grew very slowly, whereas the 

longleaf pines failed to survive. Recent studies by members of the N.C. 

State University-Tndustw Cooperative Tree Improvement Pro~am (1983) 

have indicated that drought-hardy loblolly seedlings from Texas can survive and grow better than other loblolly sources and other species 

(including Choctawhatchee sand pine) on some sandhills sites. Althorigh no 

source grew rapidly, the drought-hardy loblolly had high survival, very 

low rust, and a much greater volume than any of the other sources. The 

drought-hardy Texas foblolly source was also the most resistant source 

to fusiform rust on several other sites. These plantings are only 4 and 9 

years old, but their results are encouraging in that they do provide some 

new alternatives for regenerating sandhills sites. 

Slash Pine 

Slash pine has a relatively small natural range from coastal South Carolina west to eastern Louisiana (fig. 6). The typical variety (var. elliottii) 

exhibits very little geopaphic variation in commercial traits, but many active breeding and planting propams worldwide are based on trees selected from this variety. 

South Floricia slash pine (var. densa) differs from the typical variety in 

a number of characteristics, including a seedling grass stage. In central 

Florida where the two varieties overlap, many traits vary in a elinai pattern (Fisher 1983)- 

Although major differences between slash pine populatio~ls are difficult 

to detect, Squillace (1966) has identified a definite geographic pattern of 
Figure ?.-Average 10th-year heights of slash pines 

from 50 sources throughout the natural range (Squillace 1966). 
height growth at age 10. The best sources %-ere from a nar-rokv zone running from coastal South Carolina to southeastern Louisiana (fig, 7'). 

Cnfortunateiy, no clear geographic pattern of fusiform-r*ust resistance 

has been identified within the natural range of slash pine iGoddard and 

others 1983). 

Slash pine seeds from first-generation seed orchards are available on the 

open market. Although impo&ant effeets of slash pine seed sowces have 

seldom been recorded, some clones have demonstrated genotjrpe x environment i~~teractions (Rockwood 1974). For this reason a local seed orchard 

is a safer source than a more distant orchard. 

In addition to improved gowth rate, the primary regeneration need is 

for improved resistance to fusifom rust. Seedlings from first-generation 

slash pine seed orchards have demonstrated good gains in growth, but 

fusiform-rust infection rates have been higher than expected (Kraus and 

La F'arge 1984). Although 80 percent of the early siash pine selections in 

the Florida cooperative progam produced progenies with above-average 

growth rates, 55 percent were below average in rust resistance (Goddard 

and others 1973). Apparently, the early selection for rust resistance was 

not effective. 

Recommeaded Planting Zones 

The most important seed source recommendation for slash pine is to 

avoid the South Florida variety. The typical variety has performed better wherever planted. The most important commercial seed source of 

slash pin~southern Georgia and northern Florida---does have some of the 

characteristics of the South Florida variety to a small degree. It is less 

drought hardy and less cold resistant than siash pine from the northern 

or western extremities of the range (South Carolina, Mississippi, and 

Alabama). These characteristics are of little importance if the plantings we 

to be made within the natural range of slash pine where drought and cold 

do not reach critical levels, but it could be important if pla~itings are north 

or west of the natural range. 

Although seed-orchard seeds are available, some woods-rwn seeds may 

still be collected and marketed. The follo\l;ing widelines for source selection are suggested for either seed-orchard or unimproved seeds (Goddard 

1983) for: 

Planting north or west of the speeieshnatural range, seeds from the 

northeastern or western extremities of the species' range (South 

Carolina, Mississippi, or Louisiana) are preferred. 

D Planting within the natural range of slash pine as far south as the latitude of Tampa, seeds from the optimum growth zone (fig. 7) should 

perfom best. 
Planting south of the Iatitude of Tampa, seeds should be collected &om 

near the latitude of Alaehua County in northern Florida (Dorman 

19'76). A high incidence of pitch canker has been observed when more 

northern seed sources were planted in southern Fioricila, 

Because geogaphic t-ariation occurs ~xrithin as well as between varieties, seed buyers should demand cedifieation of the exact origin (State ancf 

county) of seed lots. 

Specific Problems 

Fusilforrn Rust. When regenerating sites with a high fusifom-mst 

hazard, the follo~~ng order of preference should be observed in selecting 

seeds and seedlings. 

1. Seed orchards established specifically for increased rust resistance. 

2. Seed production areas established in highly infected stands where selection of disease-free trees was intensive. 

3, Seed-orchard cone collections restricted to the most rust-resistant 

clones in the orchard. 

Pitch Canker, Kalural stands in areas with a high ir~cidence of pitch 

canker have experienced strong selection pressure against susceptible 

trees. Seed collection &om the best trees in these local natural stands 

appears, therefore, to be the best procedure for obtaining stock with 

some resistance to the disease (Goddard and others 1983). Another alternative is to collect seeds from the most resistant clones in established seed 

orchards (MeRae and others 1985). 

Nigh Gum Yield. When high gum yield is a primary objective, seedlings can be obtained from State seed orchards established for high gum 

yield. Most of these orchards were established with plant material from 

the USDA Forest Service naval stores breeding progam at Olustee, FL. 

These seedlings should produce about 50 percent higher gum yields than 

nursery-run seedlings, with some improvement in gowth rate and yield 

of tall oil. 

Longleaf Pine 

Longleaf pine is adapted p~rna~ly to coastal plain sides from southeastern Virginia do east Texas (fig. 8). The delayed height growth (pass 

stage) sf this species is unique. It must be grou7n at low density in the 

nursery and it requires special; care in storage, transportation, and 

planting* 

Longled planting progarns are eur~entiy being expanded in a number 

of organizations because the species has natural resistance to fusiform 

rust, excellent form, and high-quality wood. 
Geogaphic valiation in longleaf pine is not as obvious as in lohlolly and 

slash pine, but differences of commerciai impo~%ance have been noted. It 

is most important. as in slash pine, to avoid seed sources from the southern extremity of the range. Seedlings from central Florida sources have 

a poor survival rate when planted north of peninsular Florida (IVells and 

Wakeley 197Oa). 

Longleaf froan west af the Mississippi River should not be moved east 

of the rher, Several tests have shown it to be more susceptible to brownspot needle blight iSei~-r?zirr acicnia) than Longleaf from the gulf coast 

east of the 3Iississippi River (Henry and MTeils 1961). 

Longleaf from. the mountains of Alabama and Geor@a should not be used 

near the gulf coast, ncr shoubci gulf coast stock be piantecl in the mountains. Growth ~OSS(>S will occur. 

The central gulf coast seed source, from south 3lississippi to about 

Okaloosa County, Floricia, has grotm exceptionally well in South%-ide 

Pine Seed Source Study plavltings 1-50 miles north and as far east and west 

as central Georgia and central Louisiarza, Seecliings from this source also 

performed tveli in indepcndentk "tests by the L'nirersity of Fiorida-lndtastry Tree Xmprovemcnt Cooperative. h-bnivcver, in a large and ivelidesip-aed Southeastem Forest Expel-in~ent Station test-p~<mal<ly of Genr- 

@a and Florida sources---the central gulf coast source did not perhrm 

best in Georgia. Georgia coastal plain sources were best in that test. 
Sources from Georgia piedmont and the southern edge of the range produced the least volume per tree at 15 years,' 

Farther north, longleaf seeds from Korth and South Cxolina cart probably be freely interchanged, and tests have sho.tm no differences between 

sandhills and coastal plain sources. As in most species. seed collections 

from scattered trees at the northern extremity of the range (near the 

Virginia-Xot"ch Carolina border) should be avoided. Seeds collected from 

large, continuous popillations would be a better choice for most planting 

sites. 

Genetic Improvement 

Although there are 443 acres of first-generation longleaf pine seed orchards established in the South (Dennington and Farrar 1983), no improved seeds are currently available for sale. Primary emphasis has been 

placed on breeding for fast initial height growth (a shorter grass stage) 

and resistance to brown-spot needle blight. 

Some seeds from seed-production areas may be available. The recommended zones should be observed with seeds from either wild stands or 

seed-production areas. 

Recornmended Pla-/lti?zg Zones 

Within each of the five seed collection and planting zones (fig. 9), local 

sources have perfoi-med best {Dennington and Farrar 19833. In general, 

therefore, moving seeds from one zone to another is not recommended. 

Unpublished records, Southeastern Forest Experiment Station, Macon, CA. 
Figure 10.-Natural range of Virginia pine. 

Virginia Pine 

Virginia pine occupies a wide range from New York south to hlabama 

and l\.Iississippi (fig. 10). It is widely planted for pulpwood and Christmas trees both within and south and west of its natural range. 

Geographic Variation 

Although differences have been recorded between Virginia pine populations in the Talladega Mountains of central Alabama and the sandhills of 

the mid-Atlantic States, there are insufficient data to declare these as distinct ecotypes (Kellison and Zobel 1974). 

In a range-uide provenance study of Virginia pine, Genys (1966) found 

that sources from Alabama, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Virgnia had 

high mortality ahen planted in Pennsylvania and variable performance 

when planted in Maryland and Tennessee. 

In a 10-year-old study in Tennessee. the best sources of Virginia pine 

for Tennessee planting were from the central part of the great valley of 

Tennessee (Todd and Thor 1979). 

A number of seed orchards of Virginia pine have been established by 

Federal, State, and industrial organizations in the South. Due to the 
early flowering and heavy cone p~*oduetion of the species, these orchards 

have been producing commercial quantities of scads fcir several years. 

Due to the high interest in Christmas trees, cone coilections in some 

orchards have been confined to production of Virginia pine trees with the 

best form and color for this purpose. Seeds and seedlings from the 

Kimbrrih--Clark seed orchard hare been in great demand in recent years 

by Christmas tree groa-rrs. Trees from this central Alabama source hare 

exceptionally good form and good growth rates. 

Recii~?z?nr?l,ded Pln lzting Zoitcs 

In the absence of definitive seed zones, local seeds should be used rhenever possible. If local seeds are not available, it is safer to move seeds 

east or west within the same province rather than north or south. 

Shodleaf Pine 

Shortleaf pine has the most extensive natural range of my southern pine 

hut produces only about one-half of the total southkvide wood \-olume of 

lobloily pine (Doman 19763. The natm-ai wnge of the species extends from 

Sew York to Oklahoma and Texas (fig. 11) over a very wide range of 

sites. 
Gesgl-aphic variation in survir-a1 and poavth of shortleaf pine is related 

to the climate of the seed source iW elis 1939; F4feils ancl Wakeley 4940b). 

In plantations as fafar north as northern Mississippi, trees from southeastem sources (Georgia and South Carolina! srlririved better and pew faster 

"ran trees from northerw sources. In ptar~tatiorzs in Pennsylvania and Nera 

Jersey, how-ever, the northern siiurees were clearly superior to sci~lther3 

sources in both survival and growth, 

Clonal seed orchards of shortleaf pine have been established primarily 

by Southern State a"orestq organizations and the E'SBA Forest Ser~ice. 

A few forest indust~es have also established weham-ds, Cumently there are 

665 acres of shortleaf pine seed ~~rehards (Kitchens 1987). 

In recent years, the planting 06 shortleaf pine has decreased because 

loblolly pine survives better and ~OM-S faster on many sites formerly oceupied by shortleaf (Larnbeth and others 19S4), It is encoinra@;rng to note, 

however, that en the Ouaehlta and Ozark National Forests the survival of 

shodleaf seedlings from the seed orc-@Sraa~*cl was 22 percent higher than the 

survi~al of nursery-rixn seedlings (Kitehens 19871, 

Gumently, most of the shortleaf pine seedlings planted in the South are 

on National Forests in Arkansas, Geor@a, Kentucky, and Tennessee. Of 

the average of 22,6061 acres piiarated annually to skio~%Ieaf pine, 18,500 acres 

are on National Forests (Kitchens 1987). 

Seeds frorat shortjieaf pine seed orchards are asailable from a number 

of organizations, The same geopaphic: restrictions should be applied with 

aeed-orchard seeds as with tvild seeds. Genetic improvement is of little 

value if the seeds are not cvell adapbed to the planting site, 

Recow~neizded Plan tirrg Zot~es 

FIgpre 12 divides the range of shortleaf pine into five geopapb-iie zones. 

Based on these zones, seed-collection recommendations are: 

Ptamlting in zone - - - - --- - - - Collect seeds in zone - - - --- - b 

1 or 2 1 or 5 northern haif 

3 2, 3, or north Pi2 of 5 

4 4 - 

3 D 
q-1 \y ;j 

94~igure 12.-Seed-collection zones for shortleaf pine y., I 

Littleleaf Disease. In .a seed source study of shortieaf pine planted on 

littleleaf sites in Georgia, South Carolina, and Viv~nia, Ruehle and Gampbell (1971) found that upland sources had fewer c%l'sease symptoms than the 

coastal sources. The Prince Edward County, Virginia, source was the 

best overall source when all three plantations were considered. This source 

is in an area of high incidence of littleleaf disease, and the seeds may 

have been collected from resistant trc.t;s, In this case, natural selection 

\\~ould have favored those trees that were resistant to the disease. A similar procedure laas been recommended by Goddard and others (1983) for 

improving the resistance of slash pine to pitch canker. 

Sand Pine 

The natural range of sand pine is restricted to deep sands in Florida 

and the southelm tip of Alabaana (fig. 13). The (aeala race (variety cfuz~sa) 

is found in the central part of peninsular Flol-ida, while the Choctawhatehee race (variety imi?-zugit?ata) is located in the western end of the Florida panhandle and southern Alabama, The Ocats race has serotinous 

cones, whereas Choeta\%-hatchee cones open normally. 

In fieid tests of the two varieties, Choetawhatchee sand pine generaily 

had higher planting survival, higher resistance to root rob superior form, 

and seater tolerance to freezing temperatures (Burns 1973, 1975). 
Clonal seed orchards of CE-toc"i\vhatehee sand pine have been established 

by several organizations in the Sough, primarily in Georgia and Florida. 

h seedling seed orchard of Ocala sand pine has been established by the 

USDA Forest Service on the Ocala National Forest (Lewis and others 

1985). 

Ei"eeo~.i.lm~nded Plantitq Zones 

Choctawhatchee sand pine has been sraceessfully planted on sandhills 

sites as far no&h as South Garoli~za (Hebb 1982). This race has performed 

better than any other pine species tested in the Georgia sandhills (Outealt 

and Brendemuehl 1985). men they were last measured, the Georgia plantations ~*anged in age frm 6 to 19 years, and there were nu indications of 

serious damage from pathogens or weather. On the basis of this information, it should be safe to plant Choctaw-hatchee sard pine throughout the 

Georga and South Carolina sandhills. 

Ranting of Oeala sand pine should be restricted to peninsular Floida. 

Direct seeding of Ocala sand pine has been successful on some sites on the 

Beala National Forest, but the survival of planted seedlings has usually 

been poor. 
Adaptation, The process of evolutior-ia~-y (genetic) adjustments fitking 

individuals or goups to their environment. 

Cline. A geographical gradientof phenotype or genotype within the 

species?srnge, Detem-mining \+-hethen. a cline is genetic t-equires a test in 

a single en\*ironment, Usually ciixlal variation results &ern an en~ironmental gradient, Portions of populations exhibiting such continuous (elinaii 

change from one area to another should not "n designated as ecotypes, 

races, or taxa. 

Clone, A group of genetically identical plants derived asexually from a single individual. 

Ecotype, A race adapted to the selective action of a par-tieular environment. Mos"Edifference~ among emtypes show up only when different ecotypes are tested in a tznifom environment. Ecotyypes are descr+bed, e.g., 

as climatic or edaphic, 

Genotype, (1) An individuad's hereditary eonstitut-iorz, with or without 

phenotpic expression of the one or more characters it underlies. Also %he gene ciassifieation sf this con~tit~tion expressed in a formula. The 

genotype is determined chiefly from performance of progeny and other 

relatives. It interacts with the environment do prodwee the phenotype. (2) 

Individual(s) eharactel+zed by a certain genie constilxution. 

Genotype-environment interaction, The failure of entries to maintain 

the same relative ranks and Level of differences when tested in different 

environments. 

Geographic race- The race native to a, geographic area. 

Geog-raphic variation, The phenotypic: differences among native "crees 

pawing in different portions of a species' range, If the differences are 

largely genetic rather than einviro~an~cntal, the variation is usually specified as racial, ecot~pic, 08" clinai, 

Local seed source, Source nati~e to ",he locality in which the seedlings 

are to be pox-n, Lee, belonging $0 khc ind~gcnous geogayl-nlc race, Its 

seed-collection zone is usually d~fined expcr-irrr~erntaily as being avithh a acertain distance or elevation of the planting site, 

Phenotype, The piant or character a? ive see? it: skate, description, or 

degree of expression of z. character: the prtducit of the interaction of the 

' From Sq-tier, E.B. 1972, Glijssary for forest tree impriis-tamene ~sorker-. re\-. Spa%- (Q)~?eane, 

LA: V.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Sonthem Forest Experiment Station. 

22 pp. 1,'nnumberc;rl publication. 
genes of an organism (genotype) with the environment, brhen the total 

character expressions of an individual are considered, the phenotype descl-ibes the inclividual. Similx phenotj~es do not necessarily breed dike. 

Progeny Lest. Evaluation of parents by comparing the perforn~ance of 

their offspring. Accuracy is usually gained because several to many offspring per parent are evaluated under more controlled conditions than 

exist for the parent. 

Race. A population that exists a species and exhibits general genetic characteristics discontinuous and distinct from those of other populations. It is usually an interbreeding unit. When the distinguishing characteristics of a race are adaptive, the term is synonymous with ecotype, 

and the race is described similarly, e.g., climatic, edaphic. 

Roguing. Systematic removal of individuals not desired for the peqetuation of a population; culling. 

Seed-collection zone. Zone of trees with relatively uniform genetic 

(racial) composition as determined by progeny-testing various seed 

sources, The encompassed area usually has definite geographic bounds, 

climate, and g-rotving conditions. A single geographic race may be divided 

into several zones. 

Seed orchard. A plantation consisting of clones or seedlings from selected treest isolated to reduce pollination from outside sources, rogued 

of undesirables, and cultured for early and abundant production of seeds. 

Seed-production area. A plus stand that is generally upgraded and 

opened by removal of undesirable trees and then cultured for early and 

abundant seed production. 

Seed source. The locality where a seed lot was collected; also the seed 

itself. If the stand from which collections were made was in turn from 

nonnative ancestors, the original seed source should also be recorded and 

designated as the provenance. 

Selection. Often ~ynon~pous with adificial selection, which is the choice 

by the breeder of individuals for propagation from a larger population. 

Artificial selection may be for one or more desired characteristics. It may 

be based on the tree itself (phenotypicj, or on the tree's progeny or other 

relatives (genotypic). Refers also to the tree selected. 
References 

Balmer, Wiiliam E.: Williston, Hamlin L. 197'4. Guide for planting southern 

pines. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Apiculture, State and Private 

Forestv, Southeastern Area. 17 pp. 

Barber, John C, 1975. Seed certification. In: Faulkner, Roy, ed. Seed orchards. For. Comm. Bull. 54. London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office. 

PP. 143-149. 

Barbour, Henry F. 1980. Loblolly seed sources for west Kentucky. In: Lantz, 

Clark W., comp. Proceedings 1980 southern nursery conference. Tech. Publ. 

SA-TP17. 1980 September 2-4; Lake Barkley, KY. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Depdment of Agriculture, Forest Service, State and Private Forestry, Southeastern Area. pp. 15-23. 

Bethune, James E. 1966. Performance of two slash pine varieties planted in 

south Florida. Res. Pap. SE-24. Asheville, NC: U.S. Depamment of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southeastern Forest Experiment Station. 9 pp. 

Burns, Russell M. 1973. Comparative growth of planted pines in the sandhills 

of Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina. In: Sand pine symposium proceedings; 19'72 December 5-7; Panama City Beach, FL. Gen. Tech. Rep. SE-2. 

Asheville. NC: U.S. Department of A@cu!ture, Forest Sei-vice, Southeastern Forest Experiment Station. pp. 124-134. 

Burns, Russell M. 1975. Sand pine: fifth-year survival and height on prepared 

and unprepared sandhill sites. Res. Note 33-217. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southeastern Forest Experiment 

Station. 5 pp. 

Chapman, H.R. 1922. A new hybrid pine (Pirzus palustris x Pinus taeda), 

Journal of Forestry 20(7):729-734. 

Dennington, Roger W. ; Famar, Robert M., Jr. 1983. Longleaf pine management. For. Rep. R-8-FR 3. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service, Southern Region. 17 pp. 

Dorman, Keith W. 1976. The genetics and breeding of southern pines. Agric. 

Handb. 471. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service. 407 pp. 

Easley, L.T. 1963. Growth of loblolly pine from seed produced in a seed production area vs. nursery-run stock. Journal of Forestry 61(5):388-389. 

Fisher, Richard F. 1983. Silvical characteristics of slash pine (Pinus elliottii 

Englem. [sic] var [sic] elliottii). In: Stone, E.L., ed. The managed slash 

pine ecosyskm: Proceedings of a symposium; 1981 June 9-11; Gainesville, FL. 

Gainesville: University of Florida, School of Forest Resources and Conservation, pp. 48-55. 

Genys, John B. 1966. Geogaphic variation in Virginia pine. Silvae Genetica 

15(1):72-76. 

Gilmore, A.R. 1980. Extending the range of loblolly pine in the Mississippi 

River Valley: factors relating to growth and longevity. In: Lantz, Clark W., 

comp. Proceedings 1980 southern nursery conference. Tech. Publ. SA- 
TP17. 1980 September 2-4; Lake Barkley, KY. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, State and Private Forestry, Southeastern Area. pp. 8-14. 

Gladstone, William T. 1982. Customize or compromise: an aiternative for 

loblolly. In: Proceedings of the 16th southern forest tree improvement 

conference; 1981 May 21-28; Blacksburg, VA. Southern Forest Tree Improvement Committee sponsored publication 38. pp.200-202. 

Goddard, R.E. [uith contr?ibutions by Hollis, C.A., 111; Rok, H.R.; Rockwood. D. L.; Strickland, R. K.]. 1973. Cooperative forest genetics research 

provam: 15th progess report. Res. Rep. 21. Gainesvilte, FL: University 

of Florida, School of Forest Resources and Conservation. 19 pp. 

Goddard, R. E. ; Schmidt, R. A. ; Vande Linde, F. 1975. Immediate gains in fusiform rust resistance in slash pine from rogued seed production areas in 

severely diseased plantations. In: Proceedings of the 13th southern forest tree improvement conference; 1975 June 10-11; Raleigh, NC. Southern 

Forest Tree Improvement Committee sponsored publication 35. pp. 197-203. 

Goddard, R. E. ; Wells, 0.0.; Squillace, A. E. 1983. Genetic improvement of 

slash pine. In: Stone, E. L., ed. The managed slash pine ecosystem: Proceedings of a symposium; 1981 June 9-11; Gainesville, FL. Gainesville: University of Florida, School of Forest Resources and Conservation. pp. 56-68. 

Hebb, Edwin A. 1982. Sand pine performs well in the Georgia-Carolina sandhills. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry 6(3):144-147. 

Henry, B.W.; Wells, Osborn 0. 1967. Variation in brown-spot infection of 

longleaf pine from several geographic sources. Res. Note SO-52. New 

Orleans, LA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern 

Forest Experiment Station. 4 pp. 

Hyun, S.K. 1970. The growth performance of pitch-loblolly hybrid pine produced by different geographic races of loblolly pine in their early age. vol. 

1. In: Second world consultation on forest tree breeding; 1969 August 7- 

16; Washington, DC. pp. 803-814. 

Jones, Earle P., Jr.; Wells, Osborn 0. 1969. Ice damage in a Georgia planting of loblolly pine from different seed sources. Res. Note SE-126. Asheville, 

NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southeastern Forest Experiment Station. 4 pp. 

Kellison, R.C.: Zobel, B.J. 1974. Genetics of Virginia pine. Res. Pap. WO-21. 

Washington, DC: U. S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 10 pp. 

Kitchens, Robert N. 1967. Trends in shortleaf pine tree improvement. In: 

Murphy, Paul A., ed. Symposium on the shortleaf pine ecosystem. 1986 

&larch 31-April 2; Little Rock, AR. Fayetteville, AR: Cniversity of 

Arkansas, Cooperative Extension Service. pp. 89-100. 

Kraus, John F.: La Farge, Timothy. 198.2. Early results of a slash pine variety trial. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry 8(1):41-43. 

Kraus, John F. : %'ells, 0.0.; Sluder, E.R. 1984. Review of provenarlce variation in loblolly pine (Pinz~s taeda L.) in the Southern United States. In: 

Barnes, R. D. ; Gibson, G. L., eds. Provenance and genetic improvement 
Wells, 0.0. 1979. Geographic seed source affects performance of planted 

shortleaf pine. In: Proceedings: symposium for the management of pines 

of the interior South: 1978 November 7-8; Qoxville, TN. Tech. Publ. 

SA-TP2. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Agicuiture, Forest Service, 

Southeastern Area, State and Private Forestry, pp. 48-55. 

Wells, 0.0. 1985. Use of Livingston Parish, Louisiana loblolly pine by forest products industries in the Southeast. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry 9(3):180-185. 

Wells, 0.0.; Barnett, F.E.; Derr, W.J. land others]. 1998. Shortleaf x slash 

pine hybrids outperform parents in parts of the Souteast. Southern Journal 

of Applied Forestry 2(1):28-32. 

Wells, 0.0.; Lambeth, C.C. 1983. Loblolly pine provenance test in southern 

Arkansas: 25th year results. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry 9(2): 

71-75. 

Wells, 0.0.; Switzer, G.L. 1911. Variation in rust resistance in Mississippi lobLolly pine. In: Proceedings of the 11th conference on southern forest tree 

improvement; 1971 June 15-16; Atlanta, GA. Southern Forest Tree Improvement Committee sponsored publication 33. pp. 25-30. 

Wells, Osborn 0. 1983. South~de pine seed source study-loblolly pine at 

25 years. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry 7(2):63-71. 

Wells, Osborn 0.; Wakeley, Philip C. 1966. Geographic variation in survival, 

growth, and fklsifom-mst infection of planted loblolly pine. Forest Science 

Monogaph 11. 40 pp. 

Wells, Osborn 0.; Wakeley, Philip C. 1970a. Variation in longleaf pine from 

several geogaphic sources. Forest Science 16(1):28-42. 

Wells, Osborn 0.; Wakeley, Philip C. 1970b. Variation in shortleaf pine from 

several geographic sources. Forest Science 16(4):415-423. 

Zobel, Bruce; Talbert, John. 1984. Applied forest tree improvement. New 

Uork: John Wiley & Sons. 505 pp. 

Zobel, Bruce J. 1953. Are there natural loblolly-shortleaf pine hybrids? Journal of Forestry 51(7):494-495. 
Lantz, Clark W.; 'Mraus, John F. 

1987. A pide to southern pine seed sources. Gen. Tech. Rep. SE-43. Asheville, 

NC: U.S. Department of A@culture, Forest Service, Southeastern Forest Experiment Station. 34 pp. 

The selection of an appropriate seed source is critical for successful southern pine 

plantations. Guides for selection of seed sourees are presented for loblolly, slash, 

longleaf, Virginia, shortleaf, and sand pines. Separate recommendations are given 

for areas where fusifom-rust hazard is high. 

KEYWORDS: Planting zones, provenance tests, geopaphic variation, Pinus 

taeda, Pinus elliottii, Pinus palz~stris, Pinus virginialza, Pinus echinata, Pinus 

cliausa. 

Lantz, Clark W,; Kraus, John F. 

1987. A pide to southern pine seed sources. Gen. Tech. Rep. SE-43. Asheville, 

NC: U.S. Dep&ment of AMeultwe, Forest Service, Southeastern Forest Expel5merat Station. 34pp. 

The selection of an appropriate seed source is critical for successjfirl southem pine 

plantations. Guides for selection of seed sources are presented for loblolly, slash, 

longleaf, Virginia, shortleaf, and sand pines. Separate recommendations are given 

for weas where fusifom-rust hazard is high. 

KEYWORDS: Planting zones, provenance tests, geographic variation, Pinus 

Iczeda, Pinus elliotkii, Pinus palustris, Pir~us virginiana, Pirtus echinata, Pinus 

e Lausa .