Skip to Main Content
U.S. Forest Service
Caring for the land and serving people

United States Department of Agriculture

Home > Search > Publication Information

  1. Share via EmailShare on FacebookShare on LinkedInShare on Twitter
    Dislike this pubLike this pub
    Author(s): James D. HaywoodMary Anne S. SayerShi-Jean Susana Sung
    Date: 2015
    Source: In: Holley, A. Gordon; Connor, Kristina F.; Haywood, James D., eds. Proceedings of the 17th biennial southern silvicultural research conference. e–Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS–203, Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station: 383-390.
    Publication Series: Proceedings - Paper (PR-P)
    Station: Southern Research Station
    PDF: View PDF  (298.48 KB)

    Description

    Two studies were established in central Louisiana to compare development of planted loblolly (Pinus taeda L.), longleaf (P. palustris Mill.), and slash (P. elliottii Engelm.) pine. Study 1 was on a Beauregard silt loam, and Study 2 was on Ruston and McKamie fine sandy loams. After 10 growing seasons, stocking ranged from 1,165 longleaf to 1,606 loblolly pines per ha in Study 1. Slash (9.8 m) and loblolly (8.9 m) pine trees had similar average total heights, and both were taller than longleaf pine (5.3 m). Volume production was comparable between slash (134 m3/ha) and loblolly (111 m3/ha) pine, and longleaf pine (24 m3/ha) had the least volume per ha. In Study 2, stocking ranged from 1,907 longleaf to 2,356 slash pines per ha. Slash (11.2 m) and loblolly (10.8 m) pine trees had similar average total heights, and both were taller than longleaf pine (9.2 m). Volume production was similar between slash (181 m3/ha) and loblolly (162 m3/ha) pine, and both produced more volume per ha than longleaf pine (96 m3/ha). Although outcomes in growth and yield among species were similar in both studies, the magnitude of differences between longleaf versus loblolly and slash pine was greater in Study 1 than Study 2 for several reasons. While longleaf pine had the poorest growth and yield, its early development normally lags behind that of other southern pines, and longleaf pine grew sufficiently well to warrant consideration if other values are taken into account, which are herein discussed.

    Publication Notes

    • You may send email to pubrequest@fs.fed.us to request a hard copy of this publication.
    • (Please specify exactly which publication you are requesting and your mailing address.)
    • We recommend that you also print this page and attach it to the printout of the article, to retain the full citation information.
    • This article was written and prepared by U.S. Government employees on official time, and is therefore in the public domain.

    Citation

    Haywood, James D.; Sayer, Mary Anne S.; Sung, Shi-Jean Susana. 2015. Comparison of planted loblolly, longleaf, and slash pine development through 10 growing seasons in central Louisiana--an argument for longleaf pine. In: Holley, A. Gordon; Connor, Kristina F.; Haywood, James D., eds. Proceedings of the 17th biennial southern silvicultural research conference. e–Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS–203, Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station: 383-390.

    Keywords

    loblolly pine, longleaf pine, slash pine, Pinus palustris, Pinus elliottii, Pinus taeda, development

    Related Search


    XML: View XML
Show More
Show Fewer
Jump to Top of Page