Pruning to manage white pine blister rust in the southern Rocky Mountains

Crump, Amanda; Jacobi, William R.; Burns, Kelly S.; Howell, B.

doi:10.2737/rmrs-rn-44

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As others have shown, branch cankers were well distributed throughout tree crowns (Burns et al, 2011;Crump et al, 2011;Jacobi et al, 2016). The average number of branch cankers per infected tree was 3.6 in 2004-2007 and decreased to 2.7 in 2016-2017 (−0.9 ± 0.1, P < 0.0001; Supplementary Table 7).…”

Section: Study Areamentioning

confidence: 55%

Interactions between white pine blister rust, bark beetles, and climate over time indicate vulnerabilities to limber pine health

Burns¹,

Tinkham

Leddy

et al. 2023

Front. For. Glob. Change

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionLimber pine is a keystone species in the Rocky Mountains that grows on harsh, high elevation sites where few other tree species can. Recent studies suggest the species is threatened by the combined impacts of the exotic, invasive disease, white pine blister rust (WPBR), native bark beetles, and climate change. Information on changes in the health of limber pine populations and long-term impacts posed by these threats is needed to inform management efforts.MethodsWe established 106 long-term monitoring plots in 10 study areas that were surveyed three times between 2004 and 2017. We assessed site and stand factors, tree health, and regeneration over time to detect changes in limber pine abundance and health, cumulative impacts of WPBR and bark beetles, and to evaluate the drivers of WPBR occurrence and severity.ResultsLimber pine health declined significantly over the study with more than 20% of initially live limber pine trees dead by the last measurement cycle, primarily due to WPBR and bark beetles. While some recruitment occurred, mortality rates greatly outpaced recruitment of ingrowth. Disease incidence and how it changed over time was variable, but disease severity increased substantially overall and in all study areas. Limber pine regeneration was low or absent in most sites and mortality caused by WPBR increased significantly. We found strong relationships between WPBR and aridity. Trees in habitats with high vapor pressure deficit were less likely to be infected with WPBR, but trees that were already infected were more likely to develop severe symptoms and die. Longer growing seasons increased the likelihood of WPBR presence and mortality. Growing season length and vapor pressure deficit tended to increase over the study, suggesting that climate change may exacerbate disease impacts.DiscussionDeclining health of limber pine coupled with high mortality rates, increasing disease severity, and low levels of natural regeneration indicate successful recovery may not occur in some locations without management intervention. Proactive management strategies to reduce insect and disease impacts and promote stand recovery and resilience should be pursued in remaining, healthy limber pine ecosystems.

show abstract

Section: Study Areamentioning

confidence: 55%

Interactions between white pine blister rust, bark beetles, and climate over time indicate vulnerabilities to limber pine health

Burns¹,

Tinkham

Leddy

et al. 2023

Front. For. Glob. Change

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There are no chemical treatments effective against WPBR; however, we recommend sanitation pruning (excision of cankered branches) to extend the lifespan of an infected tree (Burns et al 2008;Crump et al 2011;Jacobi et al 2017; see Section 5, guideline 5). It is imperative to tag the treated tree so it is not mistaken as cankerfree (and therefore putatively genetically resistant to WPBR) in future monitoring efforts.…”

Section: Promote In Situ Conservationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Ribes eradication was not successful in the western United States; chemical controls are not practical on a forest scale, and thinning was found to increase WPBR infection by exposing more foliage to inoculum (Burns et al 2008;Maloy 1997;Schwandt et al 1994). Preventive and sanitation pruning (i.e., removal of infected branches) can prolong the life of infected trees but is labor-intensive and therefore feasible only early in the infection process or for high-value trees; it is too expensive for application at a forest scale (Burns et al 2008;Crump et al 2011. While sanitation pruning does not contribute to an increase in the overall frequency of disease resistance in the forest and therefore resilience, it may retain high-value trees and enable tree survival to provide other ecosystem services (e.g.…”

Section: White Pine Blister Rust Biology and Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%