Interspecific competition and herbicide injury influence 10-year responses of coastal Douglas-fir and associated vegetation to release treatments

Harrington, Timothy B.; Wagner, Robert G.; Radosevich, Steven R.; Walstad, John D.

doi:10.1016/0378-1127(95)03558-r

Cited by 32 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A temporal shift in dominance from herbaceous to woody species would explain the observed increase in volume at year 8 resulting from the woody-only control at Summit absent in year 3. Harrington et al [13] found that across several Washington and Oregon Coast Range plantations that were already two to three years old at the onset of their study, deciduous tree cover did not begin to significantly impact Douglas-fir basal-area and height growth for three years and five years, respectively. By year 10, tree cover was the most competitive component of the vegetation community.…”

Section: Response To Herbaceous Versus Woody Competitionmentioning

confidence: 89%

“…Without fencing at this site, response to control of the woody component would have likely been lessened as deer would have reduced the level of cherry in-growth in untreated plots and cover of other potentially dominant tree species was negligible. Bigleaf maple (Acer macrophyllum Pursh) and especially red alder are tree species with widespread occurrence in the Oregon Coast Range with high dominance potential [6,13,27]. Had we chosen study sites where either of these species was a significant component of the plant community, response to control of the woody vegetation component would likely have been strong.…”

Section: Response To Herbaceous Versus Woody Competitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…menziesii [Mirbel] Franco) growth [1,12], numerous studies have demonstrated the importance of herbaceous vegetation as a competitor to Douglas-fir [6,11,19,20,24]. Few studies have reported the relative effects of both herbaceous and woody competition on Douglas-fir [6,13,30,33]. Rose et al [25] is the only published study comparing Douglas-fir growth responses following complete control of woody vegetation (without control of herbaceous vegetation) to complete control of herbaceous vegetation (without control of woody vegetation) in a developing stand.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Miller et al [18] found that across 13 southeastern United States loblolly pine plantations, woody cover in untreated plots has gradually risen across the first 15 years of the study, whereas herbaceous cover reached a peak by year two and began to drop in all cases by year seven -earlier at some sites. Harrington et al [13] found that Douglas-fir basal-area growth following a series of weed control treatments was significantly limited by herbaceous cover in years 2 and 3, shrub cover in years 3 through 5 and tree cover in years 3 through 10. These results underscore the fact that studies comparing the effects of woody versus herbaceous control must be carried out long-term in order to capture the effects of changing dynamics in vegetation communities resulting from early treatments.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Eighth-year response of Douglas-fir seedlings to area of weed control and herbaceous versus woody weed control

Rose

Rosner

2005

Ann. For. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

-Coastal Douglas-fir growth response to eight experimental weed control treatments has been followed for eight years since planting at two western Oregon sites. Treatments included six areas of weed control around individual trees -0.0m 2 , 0.375 m 2 , 1.49 m 2 , 3.35 m 2 , 5.95 m 2 , and 9.63 m 2 (total vegetation control [TVC]) -control of herbaceous competition only or control of woody competition only. Herbaceous vegetation control treatments were maintained for the first two years after planting, while woody vegetation control treatments were maintained for three years. The greatest gain in Douglas-fir growth from increasing the area of control was observed between the 0.0 m 2 and the 0.375 m 2 treatments. Growth continued to increase, however, with increasing area of control out to complete weed control. The 5.95 m 2 and 9.63 m 2 treatments increased eighth-year individual-tree volume relative to the check treatment by 260% (20.9 dm 3 ) and 307% (24.7 dm 3 ), respectively. While herbaceous control increased growth at both sites, woody control affected growth only at the site having the hardwood component with greater height growth potential. Growth differences among treatments eight years after planting are discussed in terms of distance to competition and shifting dominance from herbaceous to woody vegetation over time.vegetation management / herbaceous competition / woody competition / area of weed control / herbicides Résumé -Impact de la surface désherbée et d'un contrôle de la végétation herbacée ou de la végétation ligneuse sur la croissance de jeunes sapins de Douglas âgés de huit ans. La réponse en termes de croissance de plants de Douglas verts huit ans après plusieurs modalités de contrôle de la végétation adventice a été étudiée dans deux sites de l'ouest de l'Oregon. Les traitements comprennent 6 surfaces de contrôle des mauvaises herbes autour d'arbres individuels -0,0 m 2 , 0,375 m 2 , 1,49 m 2 , 3,35 m 2 , 5,95 m 2 et 9,63 m 2 (contrôle total de la végétation (TVC)) -contrôle de la compétition herbacée seulement ou contrôle de la végétation ligneuse. Les traitements de contrôle de la végétation herbacée ont été maintenus les 2 premières années après plantation tandis que les traitements de contrôle de la végétation ligneuse ont été maintenus 3 ans. Le plus grand gain de croissance du Douglas avec l'augmentation de la surface de contrôle a été observé entre le traitement 0,0 m 2 et 3,75 m 2 . Toutefois la croissance continue à augmenter avec l'accroissement de la surface de contrôle en dehors d'un contrôle total des mauvaises herbes. Les traitements 5,95 m 2 et 9,63 m 2 présentent après 8 années un accroissement relatif de volume individuel d'un arbre de 260 % (20,9 dm 2 ) et 307 % (24,7 dm 2 ). Alors que le contrôle de la végétation herbacée augmente la croissance dans les deux sites d'étude, le contrôle de la végétation ligneuse influence la croissance uniquement dans le site qui a une composante d'espèces de feuillus ayant un fort potentiel de croissance en hauteur. Les différence...

show abstract

Section: Response To Herbaceous Versus Woody Competitionmentioning

confidence: 89%

Section: Response To Herbaceous Versus Woody Competitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Eighth-year response of Douglas-fir seedlings to area of weed control and herbaceous versus woody weed control

Rose

Rosner

2005

Ann. For. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, several studies have examined the impact of different weed control regimes on growth [4,10,37,38], or the impact of various fertilizers [5,40]. Fewer studies can be found that evaluated the interactive effect of more than one silvicultural treatment, such as the effect of weed control in concert with fertilization [23,29,44].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interaction of initial seedling diameter, fertilization and weed control on Douglas-fir growth over the first four years After Planting

Rose

Ketchum

2003

Ann. For. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

-Planting larger stock, fertilization and added years of weed control are often employed to increase growth rate of plantations. We evaluated these techniques using a replicated factorial study design repeated in two diverse locations in western Washington State, USA. Two different sizes of planting stock, fertilizing at planting and in the following year, and two or three years of weed control were tested. No significant interactions among the treatment levels were found with all treatments influencing Douglas-fir growth in an additive manner. Fourth year stem volume gains were greatest from planting larger initial stock: planting seedlings 2 mm larger in basal diameter resulted in fourth-year stem volume gains of 35% and 43%. The fertilization treatments used produced early gains, but they were short lived. The third-year weedcontrol treatment had no observable effect on fourth-year stem volume or on volume growth in years three or four. free-to-grow / herbicide / controlled-release fertilizer / nutritionRésumé -Interaction du diamètre au collet initial des plants, de la fertilisation et du contrôle de la végétation concurrente avec la croissance du Douglas pendant les quatre années suivant la plantation. Pour accélérer la croissance des plantations, on fait souvent appel à des techniques telles que l'emploi de plants plus gros, la fertilisation ou le contrôle de la végétation concurrente pendant plusieurs années. Nous avons évalué ces techniques au moyen de dispositifs factoriels avec répétitions installés dans deux stations de l'ouest de l'État de Washington aux USA. On a testé les options suivantes : deux catégories de plants pour leurs dimensions, fertilisation à la plantation et l'année suivante, et deux ou trois ans de contrôle de la végétation concurrente. Aucune interaction significative entre traitements n'a pu être mise en évidence. Tous les traitements agissant sur la croissance du Douglas le font de manière additive. La quatrième année, les gains de volume des tiges sont les plus élevés avec le matériel végétal initial le plus gros. Avec des plants dont le diamètre au collet est de 2 mm plus élevé, on obtient la quatrième année des gains sur le volume de tige de 35 et 43 %. Les traitements de fertilisation utilisés se sont traduits par des gains au départ, mais de courte durée. Le contrôle de la végétation de la troisième année n'a pas eu d'effet observable sur le volume des tiges de la quatrième année ou sur la croissance en volume des années trois et quatre. croissance libre / herbicide / épandage contrôlé de fertilisation / nutrition

show abstract

Response of planted beech (Fagus sylvaticaL.) and Douglas-fir (Pseudotsugamenziesii(Mirb.) Franco) saplings to herbaceous and small shrubs control on clearcuts

Petriţan

Lüpke

Petriţan

2012

Journal of Forest Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Response of planted beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) and Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii (Mirb.) Franco) saplings to herbaceous and small shrubs control on clearcuts Ion Catalin Petriţan • Burghard von Lüpke • Any Mary Petriţan Abstract The reaction of young beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) and Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii (Mirb.) Franco) saplings on competition of two types of vegetation-(1) gramineous with mainly Agrostis capillaries, Calamagrostis epigejos, Deschampsia flexuosa, and (2) small shrubs with mainly Rubus fruticosus and R. idaeus-on clear cuts on two sites was studied for 2 years. Half the sample saplings were released from competing vegetation by repeated herbicide applications. This treatment significantly raised the diameter increment in both species at the site with higher competition intensity, and more strongly after the removal of small shrubs than after the removal of grasses. Sapling length increment was not significantly affected. After being released from small shrubs, saplings of both species developed a smaller specific fine root length (cm g -1 fine root biomass) than unreleased saplings during the second year which was characterized by low rainfall. Root nitrogen concentration significantly increased after weed control in both vegetation types. Sapling foliar content of main nutritional elements was negatively related to dry mass and total chemical content of surrounding ground vegetation. Based on these results, a release from ground vegetation could be a useful tool to improve growth of planted beech and Douglas-fir saplings on sites with welldeveloped small shrubs competition (mainly by Rubus fruticosus and R. idaeus), or under fairly dry conditions.

show abstract

Interspecific competition and herbicide injury influence 10-year responses of coastal Douglas-fir and associated vegetation to release treatments

Cited by 32 publications

References 11 publications

Eighth-year response of Douglas-fir seedlings to area of weed control and herbaceous versus woody weed control

Eighth-year response of Douglas-fir seedlings to area of weed control and herbaceous versus woody weed control

Interaction of initial seedling diameter, fertilization and weed control on Douglas-fir growth over the first four years After Planting

Response of planted beech (Fagus sylvaticaL.) and Douglas-fir (Pseudotsugamenziesii(Mirb.) Franco) saplings to herbaceous and small shrubs control on clearcuts

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About