1980

Planted Pines do not Respond to Bedding on an

Acadia-Beauregard-Kolin Silt Loam Site

James D. Haywood

SUMMARY

Average height and volume of toblolly and

slash pines were not affected by site treatment

or soil differences 15 years after planting on an

Acadia-Beauregard-Kolin silt loam site. Slash

pine averaged 2.04 m more in height and yielded

22 percent more volume per hectare than did

loblolly pine.

Additional keywords: Site preparation, Pinus

taeda, Pinus elliottii var. elliottii.

INTRODUCTION

Bedding of wet, poorly drained, sandy flatwoods soils was first done in the Atlantic and

Gulf Coastal Plains of the Southeast. Pine survival

was higher, and yields were better on these

bedded sites. As use of bedding moved west,

pine performance needed to be evaluated on

fine-textured, somewhat poorly drained, flatwoods soils in the West Gulf Coastal Plain. To

fill this need, the Southern Forest Experiment

Station established site improvement studies in

central and southwest Louisiana. This report

summarizes data for the 10th to 15th years on

survival and yields of planted loblolly, Pinus

taeda L., and slash, P. elliotti Engelm. var. elliottii,

pinesfrom astudy that was installed on an AcadiaBeauregard-Kolin silt loam site.

SOIL DESCRIPTION

The study area, located in Rapides Parish, La.,

comprises Acadia (Aeric Ochraqualf, fine, montmorillonitic, thermic), Beauregard (Plinthaquic,

Paleudult, fine-silty, siliceous, thermic), and Kolin

(Glossaquic, Paleudalf, fine-silty, siliceous, thermic) silt loam soils. These soils are acidic, have

low natural fertility, and are common in flatwoods

of Arkansas, Louisiana, and Texas. Generally,

pine growth and yield would be lowest on the

Kolin soil and highest on the Beauregard soil,

but differences on this site were unimportant,

so I ignored soil effects.

The site was originally cutover, open-range

longleaf pine, P palustris Mill, land with a heavy

grass rough that was mostly free of woody vegetation. Before site treatment the scattered pines

and clumps of southern bayberry, Myrica cerifera

L., were removed, and the site was fenced to

keep out livestock.

Southern Forest Experiment Station/T-l 0210 U.S. Postal Services Bldg., 701 Loyola Avenue, New Orleans, La. 70113

Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Serving Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Eastern Oklahoma, Tennessee, Eastern Texas.
Treatments were replicated three times with

each species in a randomized block design. Site

treatments were:

Check- Seedlings were planted in a heavy

grass rough.

Disked - 2.13-m wide strips were double flatdisked with a heavy-duty offset plowing harrow that cuts about 10 cm

deep.

Bedded - 2.13-m wide strips were double flatdisked; then continuous beds were

made with a terracing harrow. Mounds

were about 30 cm high before settling.

Furrowed - Furrows 8-10 cm deep and about

1.22 m wide were cut with a fire plow.

Furrowed and disked strips were spaced 2.44 m

apart, center-to-center. Furrowing was done in

March 1963, and the disking and bedding treatments were done in July 1963.

Freshly lifted, graded, 1-O slash and loblolly

pine seedlings were planted by hand at a 2.44 m

by 1.83 m spacing on 0.166-ha plots during February 1964. Water was 2.5 to 8 cm deep in many

of the furrows at planting.

At stand age 15, I measured heights of all

surviving trees to the nearest 30 cm and diameters to the nearest 0.25 cm at 1.37 m above

groundline (d.b.h.), and I noted bole fusiform

rust [Cronartium quercuum (Berk.) Miyabe ex

Shirai f. sp. fusiforme Burdsall and Snow] galls.

The formulas used to get individual-tree volumes were:

For loblolly pine

V = 0.13698 + 0.0023035D2H (Hasnessand Lenhart 1972).

For slash pine

V = 0.0399 + 0.002645D2H (Moehring et al. 1973).

where:

V = volume per tree, outside bark, in cubic feet.

D = d.b.h. outside bark, in inches.

H = tree height in feet

Table 1. - Results at stand age 15

Height of dom. and

codominant trees

Volume

Species and Total Height growth per ha

site treatment Survival D.b.h. height 1 Oth-15th years outside bark

Percent

Loblolly

Grass rough. 80.8

Disked.. . 81.8

Bedded. 64.2

Furrowed. 83.1

Average. 77.5

Slash

cm ________ -__-__ meter ______________ - m3

13.97 11.80 2.68 150.01

14.14 11.95 2.53 152.28

15.16 12.37 2.57 145.03

13.29 11.77 2.38 141.17

14.14 11.97 2.54 147.12

Grass rough. . 58.9 15.92 13.72 4.11 171.02

Disked.. . 67.6 15.75 14.68 3.83 200.05

Bedded.. 52.6 16.09 14.08 3.83 163.93

Furrowed. 73.8 14.73 13.55 3.42 185.29

Average. . 63.2 15.62 14.01 3.80 180.07

Haywood is Assistant Silviculturist, Southern Forest Experiment Station, Forest Service-USDA, Pineville, Louisiana

2
I converted cubic-foot volumes to cubic-meter

volumes.

I analyzed pine survival, mean d.b.h., height

per surviving tree, mean height change from the

10th to 15th year, and cubic-meter volume (outside bark) per hectare with analyses of variance

(0.05) and preplanned orthogonal comparisons.

I transformed survival percentages into arc sine

/proportion before analysis.

RESULTS

The 14-percentage point difference in survival

between slash and loblolly pines at stand age 15

was significant (table 1). For both species, survival on bedded plots was significantly less than

survival on disked or furrowed plots.

Average pine d.b.h. was inversely related to

percent survival (table 1). Slash pines averaged

1.48 cm greater d.b.h. than did loblolly pines.

Loblolly pines on bedded plots had greaterd.b.h.

than they had on the other three treatments. But

slash d.b.h. did not differ significantly by treatment.

Once d.b.h. was adjusted for survival by analysis

of covariance, average slash pine d.b.h. was not

significantly larger than average d.b.h. of loblolly

pines. Nor did loblolly pines on bedded plots

have greater d.b.h. than did loblolly pines on the

other three treatments.

Height of dominant and codominant pines was

the best criterion for determining differences

between species and among site treatments,

because height of the taller trees is not much

affected by stand density. Dominant and codominant slash pines were taller than dominant

and codominant loblolly pines by an average of

2.04 m (table 1). No differences in average height

were associated with site treatments for either

species, 15 years after planting.

From the 10th through 15th growing seasons,

dominant and codominant slash pines grew

1.26 m taller than did loblolly pines (table 1).

Periodic height growth of slash pines was greater

on checks than on mechanically treated plots

and less on furrowed plots than on disked and

: bedded plots. Periodic height growth of loblolly

pine during the last 5 years did not differ sig-

-nificantly among treatments.

Slash pines had 22 percent more volume per

hectare than did loblolly pines after 15 years

(table 1). Volume per hectare did not differ significantly among treatments for either species.

Volume growth per hectare was good, averaging 9.808 m3 outside bark yearly for loblolly and

12.005 m3 outside bark yearly for slash pines.

DISCUSSiON

Survival differences for slash pines were apparently not related to site treatment, because

when Derr and Mann (1970) reported on this

study at stand age 5, they found no important

differences among treatments in survival of slash

pines. But survival of loblolly pines was lower on

bedded plots than on furrowed, flat-disked, or

check plots. The incidence of fusiform rust at 5

years best explains later survival. Derr and Mann

(1970) found that 32 percent of living slash pines

on bedded plots had bole fusiform rust cankers,

while only 14 percent of living slash pines on

the other three treatments had bole cankers.

They noted that 16 percent of the loblolly pines

on bedded plots had bole infections, while an

average of only 6 percent of loblolly pines on

the other three treatments were infected. Such

differences are not surprising since a high incidence of fusiform rust is associated with intensive culture (Dinus and Schmidt 1977).

By stand age 15, 42 percent of all living trees

had bole galls, and there were no significant

differences in the percentage of living, rustinfected trees between slash and loblolly pines

or among site treatments. So fusiform rust should

not cause differences in mortality past age 15.

Shoulders (1970, 1976) found that the growth

and yield of slash and loblolly pine were often

equal by stand age 25 despite a faster start by

slash pine. So it is too early to conclude that

slash pine is a better species for planting on an

Acadia-Beauregard-Kolin silt loam soil.

The three methods of mechanical site preparation tested did not affect the growth and yield

of loblolly pine. Amount of periodic height growth

of loblolly during the last 5 years suggests that

these results are not likely to change. Heights

were also comparable for slash pine on check

and mechanically treated plots. But amount of

periodic height growth during the last 5 years

suggests that slash pines on checks might now

be outgrowing trees on mechanically prepared

plots. Clearly, mechanical site treatments were

unnecessary on this Acadia-Beauregard-Kolin

silt loam soil.
A similar study, in Rapides Parish, La., was

located on a Caddo (Typic Glossaqualf, fine-silty,

siliceous, thermic) and Beauregard silt loam

complex (Cain 1978). Height of the 100 tallest

loblolly pines and total volume per hectare were

greater on flat-disked or flat-disked, bedded plots

than on check plots at stand age 15. But there

were no height and volume differences between

flat-disked and flat-disked, bedded plots. So

added growth on mechanically treated plots was

a response to competition control, which may

have increased fertility by mixing organic matter

into the soil and by creating better soil aeration.

Bedding to increase the depth to free water was

ineffective. Slash pine was unaffected by site

treatment on this Caddo-Beauregard silt loam

soil.

Derr and Mann (1977) concluded from six

bedding studies located in Louisiana that bedding

was not worth the extra cost. Gains in early

height growth were modest, incidence of fusiform rust often increased, and bedding disrupted

the natural drainage pattern on silt loam soils

having gently rolling topographies.

Still, such results cannot be applied to all soils.

The response of southern pines to mechanical

site preparation can vary with differences in soil

topography, drainage, and climate.

LITERATURE CITED

Cain, M. D.

1978. Planted loblolly and slash pine response

to bedding and flat disking on a poorly

drained site -an update. U.S. Dep. Agric.

For. Serv. Res. Note SO-237, 6 p., South.

For. Exp. Stn., New Orleans, La.

Derr, H. J., and W. F. Mann, Jr.

1970. Site preparation improves growth of

planted pines. U.S. Dep. Agric. For. Serv.

Res. Note SO-106, 3 p., South. For. Exp.

Stn., New Orleans, La.

Derr, H. J., and W. F. Mann, Jr.

1977. Bedding poorly drained sites for planting loblolly and slash pines in southwest

Louisiana. U.S. Dep. Agric. For. Serv. Res.

Pap. SO-134, 5 p., South. For. Exp. Stn.,

New Orleans, La.

Dinus, R. J., and R. A. Schmidt, eds.

1977. Management of fusiform rust in southern

pines. Symp. Proc. Univ. Fla., Gainesville.

163 p.

Hasness, J. K., and J. D. Lenhart.

1972. Cubic-foot volumes for loblolly pine trees

in old-fietd plantations in the Interior West

Gulf Coastal Plain. Stephen F. Austin Univ.,

Texas For. Pap. 12, 7 p.

Moehring, D. M., M. R. Holmes, and R. G. Merrifield.

1973. Tables for estimating cubic foot volumes

and fresh weight of planted slash pine. Texas

A&M Univ., MP-1079, 29 p.

Shoulders, E.

1970. Growth and yield of a mixed loblollyslash pine plantation. U.S. Dep. Agric. For.

Serv. Res. Note SO-99,4 p., South. For. Exp.

Stn., New Orleans, La.

Shoulders, E.

1976. Site characteristics influence relative

performance of loblolly and slash pines. U.S.

Dep. Agric. For. Serv. Res. Pap. SO-l 15, 16

p., South. For. Exp. Stn., New Orleans, La.

*U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, 1980-771-081

4