Phosphorus fertilizer, soils, and site preparation influence loblolly pine productivity

Abstract

Application.Forest managers wishing to rapidly produce large individual pole-size loblolly pine trees should consider phosphorus fertilization with mechanical site preparation prior to planting on Udult Ultisols. If maximizing total stand volume is the primary objective, no simple recommendations can be made because of the confounding effects of soil types and site preparation methods on stand survival and yield. Fertilizer recommendations for maximizing total stand volume will have to be made on a case by case basis with considerable risk of failure.Abstract. Growth and yield of 12-year-old loblolly pine (Pinus taeda L.) plantations were compared among five subsoil textures, seven site preparation methods, with and without phosphorus fertilizer. Phosphorus broadcast before planting increased the mean size of the loblolly pine trees. However, soil differences significantly influenced stand survival, and the method of site preparation significantly affected total stand yield. Therefore, the influence of phosphorus on total stand yield depended on soil type and site preparation method. The site preparation-fertilizer combinations yielding the most volume per soil type were: on the Lucy, Ruston, and Wagram soils, shear-windrow site preparation with phosphorus; on the Kirvin and Shubuta soils, chop-burn-harrow site preparation without phosphorus; on the Calloway and Henry soils, double chopping without phosphorus; on the Sawyer soil, chopburn-harrow site preparation with phosphorus; and on the Boswell, Cadeville, Gore, and Susquehanna soils, shear-windrow-harrow site preparation without phosphorus. Soil differences and phosphorus fertilization influenced the incidence of fusiform rust in 12-year-old stands of loblolly pine.

Long-term trends in loblolly pine productivity and stand characteristics in response to thinning and fertilization in the West Gulf region

“…Previous research has documented the positive effects of fertilization on plantation loblolly pine aboveground productivity (Vose and Allen, 1988;Colbert et al, 1990;Haywood and Burton, 1990;Haywood and Tiarks, 1990;Dalla-Tea and Jokela, 1991;Haywood et al, 1997;Albaugh et al, 1998;Jokela and Martin, 2000;Borders and Bailey, 2001;Retzlaff et al, 2001;Samuelson et al, 2001). We also found that fertilization increased aboveground stand productivity.…”

Prescribed burning and productivity in southern pine forests: a review

“…Most long-term site preparation studies in the southern USA have confounded burning with mechanical treatment making it impossible to evaluate the specific effect of burning (Vitousek and Matson, 1985;Haywood and Burton, 1990;Anonymous, 1991;Edwards, 1994;Miller et al, 1995;Tiarks and Haywood, 1996). Since the introduction of imazapyr-type herbicides (Shaner and O'Connor, 1991), aerial application of chemicals has replaced mechanical treatment for control of woody competition in pine plantations.…”

Understory Plant Response to Site Preparation and Fertilization of Loblolly and Shortleaf Pine Forests

“…Ruston (fine-loam, siliceous, thermic Typic Paleudult), Kirvin (clayey, mixed, thermic, Typic Hapludult), Henry (coarse-silty, mixed, thermic Typic Fragiaqualf), Sawyer (fine-silty, siliceous, thermic Aquic Paleudult) and Boswell (fine, mixed, thermic Vertic Paleudalf), respectively, were the representative series for the 5 textural classes. Detailed descriptions of the soils present on these study sites are found in Haywood and Burton (1990).…”

“…Each experimental plot was then split into 43.9 X 15.2 m (667 m') fertilized and 43.9 X 3 1.1 m (1,365 m') unfertilized portions. The fertilization treatment consisted of a single surface broadcast application of 168 kg P205 triple superphospate/ha (73.4 kg P/ha), prior to planting loblolly pine seedlings (Haywood and Burton 1990).…”