Factors affecting broadleaf woody vegetation in upland pine forests managed for longleaf pine restoration

Addington, Robert N.; Knapp, Benjamin O.; Sorrell, Geoffrey G.; Elmore, Michele L.; Wang, G. Geoff; Walker, Joan L.

doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2015.06.028

Cited by 26 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 39 publications

(74 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A recent study from Fort Benning in GA and AL showed that the abundance of woody vegetation in the understorey was negatively related to canopy density but only on soils of finer texture (sandy clay loams vs sandy loams and loamy sands; Addington et al. ). Herbicides were effective at controlling the density of hardwood stems in the midstorey, but resulted in the release of naturally regenerated loblolly pines. Combined with suggestions from Knapp et al.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Silvicultural treatments for converting loblolly pine to longleaf pine dominance: effects on ground layer and midstorey vegetation

Knapp

Wang

Walker

2016

Applied Vegetation Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Questions How do management practices used to enhance longleaf pine (Pinus palustris) seedling survival and growth under a loblolly pine (Pinus taeda) canopy alter the structure of midstorey and ground layer vegetation? Do management treatments achieve general restoration targets for longleaf pine ecosystem structure? Location Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune, NC, USA within the Middle Atlantic Coastal Plain Ecoregion. Methods Four levels of timber harvest were applied to loblolly pine stands: Control (uncut, basal area ~16.2 m2·ha−1), MedBA (residual basal area ~9.0 m2·ha−1), LowBA (residual basal area ~6.4 m2·ha−1) and Clearcut (residual basal area of 0 m2·ha−1). Within each canopy treatment, we applied three cultural treatments selected to facilitate longleaf pine seedling success: NT (untreated), H (chemical control of woody vegetation) and H + F (chemical control plus fertilization). Vegetation responses, including the abundance (cover) of ground layer vegetation and midstorey stem densities, were reported for three growing seasons (2008–2010) following canopy removal. Results The ground layer was dominated by woody vegetation, and total vegetation cover generally increased with increasing canopy removal. Canopy treatment effects varied through time. Clearcut plots had higher total herbaceous and graminoid cover than MedBA and Control plots in 2008, while woody cover was significantly lower on Control plots than on LowBA and Clearcut plots in 2009. Clearcut plots had higher densities of loblolly pines than Control plots in 2009 and 2010. The herbicide treatment reduced hardwood densities, but increased loblolly pine densities, especially in 2010. Conclusions Successful restoration prescriptions are often site‐specific because of different land‐use history, climate, site characteristics and starting conditions. To achieve the restoration objective of creating an open midstorey with an herbaceous‐dominated ground layer when converting loblolly pine stands to longleaf pine dominance on relatively productive sites with abundant hardwoods and aggressive loblolly pine natural regeneration, canopy retention can slow the rate of development of loblolly pine regeneration and herbicides reduce hardwood stem densities. Frequent, repeated burning would likely be required to further reduce woody vegetation and increase the relative abundance of herbaceous vegetation.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Silvicultural treatments for converting loblolly pine to longleaf pine dominance: effects on ground layer and midstorey vegetation

Knapp

Wang

Walker

2016

Applied Vegetation Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…), especially on fine‐textured soils at Fort Benning, where higher site productivity facilitates rapid regrowth of hardwood vegetation (Addington et al. ). Finally, young loblolly pine regeneration, which is common in the understory of the loblolly–shortleaf pine forest, is intolerant of fire for the first few years (Shultz , Williams ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…), may need to occur where sufficient pine fuels are present on fine‐textured soils to avoid natural conversion (Addington et al. ). While it was not tested here, periodic treatment with herbicides is very likely to help with prolonging the dominance of loblolly–shortleaf pine forest in some areas by excluding competing hardwood vegetation and promoting herbaceous plants (Addington et al.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Continued treatment with frequent fire may increase the longevity of loblollyshortleaf pine forest, compared to restricting disturbance. Additionally, adjusting of fire frequency and fire intensity, important factors affecting hardwood tree encroachment (Waldrup et al 1992, Robertson and Hmielowski 2014, Reilly et al 2017, may need to occur where sufficient pine fuels are present on fine-textured soils to avoid natural conversion (Addington et al 2015b). While it was not tested here, periodic treatment with herbicides is very likely to help with prolonging the dominance of loblollyshortleaf pine forest in some areas by excluding competing hardwood vegetation and promoting herbaceous plants (Addington et al 2012).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Specifically, field data confirm loblollyshortleaf pine forest is dominated by fire-suppressive shrub and hardwood tree species, while the hardwood trees and shrubs in longleaf pine forest are largely fire facilitators, producing foliage that will burn readily under many conditions (Kane et al 2008). Additionally, high competition from hardwood tree regeneration in loblollyshortleaf pine forest facilitates colonization of canopy gaps created from overstory tree loss, and loss of pine-dominance over-time (Knapp et al 2014), especially on fine-textured soils at Fort Benning, where higher site productivity facilitates rapid regrowth of hardwood vegetation (Addington et al 2015b). Finally, young loblolly pine regeneration, which is common in the understory of the loblolly-shortleaf pine forest, is intolerant of fire for the first few years (Shultz 1997, Williams 1998.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Frequently burned loblolly–shortleaf pine forest in the southeastern United States lacks the stability of longleaf pine forest

Matusick

Hudson²,

Garrett³

et al. 2020

Ecosphere

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent decades, conservation objectives have driven changes to the management of some pine forests in the southeastern United States. Forest thinning and frequent burning of old‐field and plantation pine forests have resulted in an open loblolly–shortleaf pine forest community which resembles the original longleaf pine forest. It is, however, unclear how the structure, composition, and function of the loblolly–shortleaf forest compare to natural longleaf pine forest, and whether it represents an alternative stable state, or simply a transitional state. Understanding the stability of open loblolly–shortleaf pine forest is critical, particularly because several threatened and endangered species are now reliant on it for habitat. The structure and composition of loblolly–shortleaf forest and natural longleaf pine forest were compared using data from permanent forest plots at Fort Benning, Georgia, USA. To assess the stability of the loblolly–shortleaf pine forest and determine whether it is an alternative stable or transitional state, the LANDIS‐II forest landscape simulation model was used to simulate changes in forest type cover under no disturbance, and a frequent‐fire regime at Fort Benning. Under both management scenarios, nearly all loblolly–shortleaf pine forest converted to mixed hardwood forest over the course of the simulation, with most conversion occurring within 60 yr. In contrast, longleaf pine forest cover increased under frequent fire. Several important structural and compositional differences may have contributed to the instability of loblolly–shortleaf pine forest compared to longleaf pine forest. These include, among other factors, higher densities of resprouting hardwood trees and shrubs in loblolly–shortleaf pine forest, including sweetgum, a resilient broadleaf species capable of transforming ecosystem structure. These results highlight the instability of the open loblolly–shortleaf pine forest community and confirm that is a transitional state, destined for mixed hardwood forest in the coming decades under either no disturbance or frequent fire alone. Future forest planning should consider an active transition from the loblolly–shortleaf pine forest in the coming decades if open pine forest is to be conserved for wildlife and conservation objectives.

show abstract

Quantifying forest carbon dynamics as a function of tree species composition and management under projected climate

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Uncertainty remains about whether current rates of forest carbon uptake will be maintained with on-going climate change and increasing rates of disturbance. The potential exists for climate and disturbance to exceed the physiological tolerances of certain tree species and push forest ecosystems to a point where they become C sources. Thus, a diversity of tree species with a range of physiological tolerances could provide adaptive capacity and potentially sustain a C sink despite adverse abiotic influences. The fire-prone pine forests of the southeastern USA have been impacted by a combination of land use and fire exclusion, which has altered the demographics and composition of these historically diverse forests. We sought to quantify how prescribed fire and planting of climate-resilient tree species would alter forest carbon dynamics under projected climate change at Fort Benning, Georgia. This landscape is comprised of a diversity of forest types with a range of land-use histories and is heavily managed to meet military training objectives and federally listed species habitat requirements. We used a simulation approach to determine species-specific growth responses to projected climate and develop two management scenarios: no-management and prescribed fire coupled with planting. We ran landscape simulations of these two management scenarios under climate projections from ten global climate models to quantify how active management would alter forest carbon dynamics as a function of changing climate and wildfire. We found that the prescribed fire and plant scenario increased total ecosystem carbon (TEC) over our no-management scenario by over 20 Mg C/m 2 by late century. Despite the differences in TEC, differences in net ecosystem exchange were not realized over the entire simulation. The primary drivers of TEC differences were sustained carbon uptake and lower carbon loss to wildfire in the prescribed fire and plant scenario. Our results demonstrate that under projected climate, managing to reduce the impacts of fire and planting climate-adapted species can increase the mitigation potential of these forests.

show abstract

Factors affecting broadleaf woody vegetation in upland pine forests managed for longleaf pine restoration

Cited by 26 publications

References 39 publications

Silvicultural treatments for converting loblolly pine to longleaf pine dominance: effects on ground layer and midstorey vegetation

Silvicultural treatments for converting loblolly pine to longleaf pine dominance: effects on ground layer and midstorey vegetation

Frequently burned loblolly–shortleaf pine forest in the southeastern United States lacks the stability of longleaf pine forest

Quantifying forest carbon dynamics as a function of tree species composition and management under projected climate

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About