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


    This paper compares two new formulations of creosote and one pigment-emulsified creosote (PEC) with a formulation of creosote that met requirements of the AWPA standard P1/P13. Two softwood and two hardwood species were treated to four retention levels with each formulation. The evaluation of the four creosote formulations was done using (1) soil-block tests, (2) fungal cellar tests, and (3) field tests. This paper briefly discusses results from the soil-block tests, and updates previous reports to three years of fungal cellar tests and five years of field exposure in Saucier, Mississippi. Data from the latter two evaluation methods show that softwoods are generally protected better than hardwoods. Data indicate the retention is directly related to performance in both softwood and hardwood species.

    Publication Notes

    • 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.


    Crawford, Douglas M.; Lebow, Patricia K.; DeGroot, Rodney. 2000. Evaluation of new creosote formulations after extended exposures in fungal cellar tests and field plot tests. [The International Research Group on Wood Preservation. Section 3, Wood Protecting Chemicals : 31st annual meeting, Kona, Hawaii, USA, 14-19 May 2000. Stockholm, Sweden : IRG Secretariat, 2000].:19 p. : ill.


    Wood destroying fungi, Wood preservatives, Creosote, Exposure, Performance, Mississippi, Soil block tests, Fungal cellar tests

    Related Search

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