Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Rationale for growing southern pine seedlings at low seedbed densities

  • Review Paper
  • Published:
New Forests Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Although most bare-root pine seedlings in the Southern United States are grown at seedbed densities near 300/m2, the density used in other regions of the world is often less than 200/m2. One rationale for growing seedlings at lower seedbed densities is based on the desire to reduce the time required for successful stand establishment. Achieving a one- to two-year advancement in stand establishment can result in an additional 15 to 30 m3/ha within 15 to 20 years. Although seedling grade studies have demonstrated similar gains in volume production at ages 10 to 30 years, the findings from these studies are not widely known. The rationale in the Southern United States for growing at higher seedbed densities appears to be based on: (1) misinformation regarding the performance of morphologically improved seedlings; (2) a desire to minimize seedling and planting costs; and (3) density recommendations that are not based on volume growth in the field.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Literature

  • Anonymous. 1990. Field trip on the management of longleaf pine, pp. 265–292. In: Farrar, Jr. R. M. (Ed) Proc. Symposium on the Management of Longleaf Pine. USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. SO-75.

  • Arnold, L. E. 1978. Gross yields of rough wood products from a 25-year-old loblolly and shortleaf pine spacing study. U. of Ill. Agr. Exp. Sta. Forestry Research Report No. 78–7.4 p.

  • Autry, L. L. 1972. The residual effects of nursery fertilization and seed bed density levels on the growth of 12-, 14-, and 16-year old loblolly pine stands. M.S. Thesis, Mississippi State Univ. Starkville, Miss. 59 p.

  • Bacon, G. J. 1979. Seedling morphology as an indicator of planting stock quality in conifers. Unpublished manuscript presented at Workshop on ‘Techniques for evaluating planting stock quality’ New Zealand, August 1979.

  • Bacon G. J., Hawkins P. J. and Jermyn D. 1977. Morphological grading studies with 1–0 slash pine seedlings. Aust. For. 40(4): 293–303.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bailey R. L. 1986. Rotation age and establishment density for planted slash and loblolly pines. South. J. Appl. For. 10: 162–168.

    Google Scholar 

  • Balneaves J. M. 1983. Effect of precision sowing on growth of Pinus radiata seedlings at Edendale Nursery. N.Z.J. Forestry 28(1): 93–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnett J. P. 1991. Seedbed densities and sowing and lifting dates affect nursery development and field survival of longleaf pine seedlings. Tree Planters' Notes 42(3): 28–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bengtson G. W. 1963. Slash pine selected from nurserybeds: 8-year performance record. Jour. For. 61: 422–425.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benson A. D. and Shepherd K. R. 1976. Effect of nursery practice on Pinus radiata seedling characteristics and field performance. I. nursery seedbed density. N.Z.J. For. Sci. 6: 19–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blair R. and Cech F. 1974. Morphological seedling grades compared after thirteen growing seasons. Tree Planters' Notes 25(1): 5–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blake, J. I. and South, D. B. 1991. Planting morphologically improved seedlings with shovels. Ala. Agric. Exp. Stn. School of Forestry Series # 13.7 p.

  • Borders B. E., Green D. W. and Clutter M. L. 1991. Variable bedding, planting, harvesting and transportation costs impact optimal economic management regimes. South. J. Appl. For. 15: 38–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowles, G. P. 1981. Nursery spacing and seedling quality, pp. 101–112. In: Chavasse, C. G. R. (Ed) Forest nursery and establishment practice in New Zealand. N.Z. For. Serv., Forest Research Institute. Symposium No. 22.

  • Bowling, D. 1987. Twenty-year slash pine spacing study: what to optimize?, pp. 300–304. In: Proc. 4th Biennial Southern Silvicultural Research Conference. USDA Forest Serv., Gen. Tech. Rep. SE-42.

  • Boyer J. N. and South D. B. 1988. Loblolly pine seedling morphology and production at 53 southern nurseries. Tree Planters' Notes 39(3): 13–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brissette, J. C. and Carlson, W. C. 1987. Effects of nursery density on shortleaf pine, pp. 36–41. In: Proc. Intermountain Forest Nursery Association. USDA Forest Serv. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-151.

  • Buford M. A. 1986. Height-diameter relationships at age 15 in loblolly pine seed sources. Forest Science 32: 812–818.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burkhart H. E., Farrar K. D., Amateis R. L. and Daniels R. F. 1987. Simulation of individual tree growth and stand development in loblolly pine plantations on cutover, site-prepared areas. VPI School of Forestry and Wildlife Resources, Blacksburg, Va. Pub. # FWS-1–87. 47 p.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burns, R. M. and Brendemuehl, R. H. 1971. Nursery bed density affects slash pine seedling grade and grade indicates field performance. USDA Forest Serv., Southeast Forest Exp. Sta., Res. Pap. SE-77.

  • Carlson W. C. 1986. Root system considerations in the quality of loblolly pine seedlings. South. J. Appl. For. 10: 87–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlson, W. C. and Miller, D. E. 1990. Target seedling root system size, hydraulic conductivity, and water use during seedling establishment, pp. 53–65. In: Rose, R., Campbell, S. J. and Landis, T. D. (Eds) Proc. Combined Meeting of the Western Forest Nursery Associations. USDA Forest Serv., Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-200.

  • Carneiro, J. G. de A. 1976. Determinacao do padrao de qualidade de mudas de Pinus taeda, L. para plantio definitivo. M.S. thesis. Univ. of parana, Curitiba, Brazil. 70 p.

  • Carneiro, J. G. de A. 1985. Efeito da densidade sobre o desenvolvimento de alguns parametros morfofisiologicos de mudas de Pinus taeda L. en veveiro e apos o plantio. Unpublished thesis. Univ. of Parana, Curitiba, Brazil. 125 p.

  • Caulfield J. P., South D. B. and Boyer J. N. 1987. Nursery seedbed density is determined by short-term or long-term objectives. South. J. Appl. For. 11: 9–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caulfield J. P., South D. B. and Somers G. L. 1992. The price-size curve and planting density decisions. South. J. Appl. For. 16: 24–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cawse J. C. L. and Martyn M. G. 1981. Nogodwana open-root nursery operations schedule as at 14.08.79. South African Forestry J. 117: 45–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chapman A. G. 1948. Survival and growth of various grades of shortleaf pine planting stock. Iowa State Col. Jour. Sci. 22(4): 323–331.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, F. B. and Phares, R. E. 1961. Graded stock means greater yields for shortleaf pine. USDA Forest Service. Central States Forest Exp. Sta. Tech. Pap. 181. 5 p.

  • Cordell, C. E., Hatchell, G. E. and Marx, D. H. 1990. Nursery culture of bare-root longleaf pine seedlings, pp. 38–51. In: Farrar, R. M. Jr. (Ed). Proc. Symposium on the Management of Longleaf Pine. USDA Forest Service, Gen. Tech. Rep. SO-75.

  • Davey C. B. 1984. Pine nursery establishment and operations in the American tropics. N.C. State Univ. CAMCORE Bulletin. No. 1, N.C. State Univ., Raleigh, N.C. 36 p.

    Google Scholar 

  • Derr H.J. 1955. Seedbed density affects longleaf pine survival and growth. Tree Planters' Notes 20: 28–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dierauf, T. A. 1973. Loblolly pine seedling grade growth and survival. Virginia Div. of Forestry Occasional Report 40. 6 p.

  • Dierauf, T. A. 1980. Loblolly seed bed density study. Virginia Div. of Forestry Occasional Report 56. 4 p.

  • Donald D. G. M. 1976. The use of open-rooted pine seedlings for afforestation in South Africa. South African Forestry J. 97: 1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donald D. G. M. 1991. Nursery fertilization of conifer planting stock, pp. 135–167. In: van denDriessche R. (Ed) Mineral Nutrition of Conifer Seedlings. CRC Press, Inc. Boca Raton, FL. 274 p.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feret P. P. and Kreh R. E. 1985. Seedling root growth potential as an indicator of loblolly pine field performance. For. Sci. 31: 1005–1011.

    Google Scholar 

  • Forest Research Institute. 1988. Seedling quality and seedling specifications of radiata pine. F.R.I. Rotorua, New Zealand. What's New In Forest Research No. 171. 4 p.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foster A. A. 1956. The effect of seedbed density on seedling production at the Georgia forest nurseries. Tree Planters' Notes. 25: 1–3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, J. C. and Duryea, M. L. 1985. Increasing forest productivity and value through improved regeneration practices, pp. 131–145. In: Ballard, R. (Ed) Proc. Weyerhaeuser Science Symposium. Vol. 4. Forest Potential, Productivity and Value.

  • Hafley W. L. and Buford M. A. 1985. A bivariate model for growth and yield prediction. Forest Science 31: 237–247.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harms, W. R. and Langdon, O. G. 1977. Competition-density effects in a loblolly pine seedling stand. USDA Forest Serv., Southeast Forest Exp. Sta. Res. Pap. SE-161. 8 p.

  • Harms W. R. and Floyd F. T. 1982. Stand structure an yield relationships in a 20-year old loblolly pine spacing study. South. J. Appl. For. 5: 162–165.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hassan, A. E. 1983. Nursery equipment development for automatic feeding of bare root seedlings, pp. 246–266. In: Brissette, J. and Lantz, C. (Eds) Proc. 1982 Southern Nursery Conferences. USDA Forest Serv. Tech. Publ. R8-TP4.

  • Hatchell G. E. 1986. Nursery cultural practices affect field performance of longleaf pine, pp. 148–156. In: South D. B. (Ed). Proc. International Symposium on Nursery Management Practices for the Southern Pines. Ala. Agric. Exp. Sta., Auburn University, AL.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hatchell G. E., Dorman K. W. and Langdon O. G. 1972. Performance of loblolly and slash pine nursery selections. For. Sci. 18: 308–314.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hatchell G. E. and Muse H. D. 1990. Nursery cultural practices and morphological attributes of longleaf pine bare-root stock as indicators of early field performance. USDA Forest Serv., Asheville, N.C. Res. Pap. SE-277. 34 p.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hodge G. R., White T. L., Powell G. L. and deSouza S. M. 1989. Predicted genetic gains from one generation of slash pine tree improvement. South. J. Appl. For. 13(1): 51–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huberman M. A. 1938. Growing nursery stock of southern pines. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. USDA Leaf. 155. 8 p.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, J. H., Campbell, R. G., Duzan, Sr., H. W. and Dudley, C. S. 1979. Site index adjustments for intensive forest management treatments at North Carolina. Weyerhaeuser For. Res. Tech. Rep. 042-1404/79/24.

  • Hunt, D. L. 1967. Ninth-year performance of slash and loblolly pine nursery selections in Georgia, pp. 92–94. In: Proc. 9th Southern Conference on Forest Tree Improvement. Knoxville, Tenn. June 8–9 1967.

  • Jacobson, M. 1980. Effect of seedling grading on slash pine survival and growth. ITT Rayonier Res. Rep. # 8. 5 p.

  • Jones, E. P., Jr. 1987. Slash pine plantation spacing study — age 30, pp. 45–49. In: Proc. 4th Biennial Southern Silvicultural Research Conference. USDA Forest Serv. Gen. Tech. Rep. SE-42.

  • Kainer K. A. and Duryea M. L. 1990. Root wrenching and lifting date of slash pine: Effects on morphology, survival and growth. New Forests 4: 207–221.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuo, P. C. 1965. Studies on the quantity of seed sown and seedling density in the seedbed of slash pine. National Taiwan Univ., Exp. For. Tech. Bull. No. 38. 17 p.

  • Leach, G. N., Gresham, H. H. and Webb, A. L. 1986. Seedling grade and nursery seedling density effects on field growth in loblolly pine. Champion International Corp. Gulf States Operation Res. Note GS-86-03. 12 p.

  • Lauer D. K. 1987. Seedling size influences early growth of longleaf pine. Tree Planters' Notes 38(3): 16–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Long A. J. 1991. Proper planting improves performance. Chapter 17, pp. 303–320. In: Duryea M. L. and Dougherty P. M. (Eds). Forest Regeneration Manual. Kluwer Academic Publishers. Dordrecht/Boston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lowerts, G. A. 1987. Tests of realized genetic gain from a coastal Virginia loblolly pine first generation seed orchard, pp. 423–431. In: Proc. 19th Southern Forest Tree Improvement Conference. College Station, Tex.

  • Margolis H. A. and Brand D. G. 1990. An ecophysiological basis for understanding plantation management. Can. J. For. Res. 20: 375–390.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marx D. H. and Cordell C. E. 1987. Triadimefon affects Pisolithus ectomycorrhizal development, fusiform rust, and growth of loblolly and slash pine in nurseries. USDA Forest Serv. Asheville, N.C. Res. Pap. SE-267. 14 p.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marx D. H. and Cordell C. E. 1989. Bed density and Pisolithus ectomycorrhizae affect morphology of loblolly pine seedlings, pp. 70–79. In: Hagwood R. (Ed) Proc. 1988 Southern Forest Nursery Association Meeting. S.C. Forestry Commission, Columbia, S.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marx D. H., Cordell C. E. and ClarkIII A. 1988. Eight-year performance of loblolly pine with Pisolithus ectomycorrhizae on a good-quality forest site. South. J. Appl. For. 12(4): 275–280.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marx, D. H. et al. 1984. Commercial vegetative inoculum of Pisolithus tinctorius and inoculation techniques for development of ectomycorrhizae on bare-root tree seedlings. For. Sci. Monogr. 25. 101. p.

  • Mattoon, W. R. 1926. Loblolly pine primer. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. USDA Farmers' Bull. No. 1517. 38 p.

  • May, J. T. 1933. Effect of density of stocking on the growth and development of longleaf, loblolly and slash pine seedlings. M. S. thesis, Univ. of Georgia, Athens, Ga. 52 p.

  • Meekins E. H. 1964. A case for plating graded stock. Tree Planters' Notes 66: 7–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mexal, J. G. 1981. Seedling bed density influences seedling yield and performance, pp. 89–95. In: Lantz, C. W. (Ed) Proc. 1980 Southern Nursery Conference. USDA Forest Serv. Tech. Pub. SA-TP17.

  • Mexal J. G. and South D. B. 1991. Bareroot seedling culture. Chapter 6, pp. 89–115. In: Duryea M. L. and Dougherty P. M. (Eds). Forest Regeneration Manual. Kluwer Academic Publishers. Dordrecht/Boston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morales J. 1983. Nursery operations for bare-root Pinus caribaea seedlings production. Venezuela Forestal 11(9): 40–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muntz H. H. 1944. Effects of compost and stand density upon longleaf and slash pine nursery stock. J. For. 42: 114–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nebgen R. J. and Meyer J. F. 1986. Seed bed density, undercutting, and lateral root pruning effects on loblolly pine seedling morphology, field survival, and growth, pp. 136–147. In: South D. B. (Ed) Proc. International Symposium on Nursery Management Practices for the Southern Pines. Ala. Agric. Exp. Sta., Auburn University, Ala.

    Google Scholar 

  • Puttonen P. 1989. Criteria for using seedling performance potential tests. New Forests 3: 67–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rowan S. J. 1986. Seedbed density affects performance of slash and loblolly pine in Georgia, pp. 126–135. In: South D. B. (Ed) Proc. International Symposium on Nursery Management Practices for the Southern Pines. Ala. Agric. Exp. Sta., Auburn University, Ala.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rowan, S. J. 1987. Nursery seedling quality affects growth and survival in outplantings. Georgia Forestry Commission, Georgia Forest Research Paper-70. 15 p.

  • Sarigumba, T. I. 1985. Sustained response of planted slash pine to spacing and site preparation, pp. 79–84. In: Proc. 3rd Biennial Southern Silvicultural Research Conference. USDA Forest Serv. Gen. Tech. Rep. S0-54.

  • Scarbrough N. M. and Allen R. M. 1954. Better longleaf seedlings from low-density nursery beds. Tree Planters' Notes 18: 29–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shipman, R. D. 1958. Planting pine in the Carolina sandhills. USDA Forest Service, Southeastern Forest Exp. Sta. Sta. Pap. No. 96. 43 p.

  • Shipman R. D. 1964. Low seedbed densities can improve early height growth of planted slash and loblolly pine seedlings. Jour. For. 62: 814–817.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shiver B. D., Border D. E., PageJr. H. H. and Raper S. M. 1990. Effect of some seedling morphology and planting quality variables on seedling survival in the Georgia Piedmont. South. J. Appl. For. 14: 109–114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shoulders E. 1961. Effect of nursery bed density on loblolly and slash pine seedlings. Jour. For. 59: 576–579.

    Google Scholar 

  • Silker T. H. 1960. Economic considerations of growing and grading southern pine nursery stock. Tree Planters' Notes 42: 13–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sluder E. R. 1979. The effects of seed and seedling size on survival and growth of loblolly pine. Tree Planters' Notes 30(4): 25–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • South D. B. 1988. Nursery management affects the efficiency of a tree improvement program, pp. 203–209. In: Lowe W. J. (Ed). Proc. WGFTIP Tree Improvement Short Course. Texas Forest Serv., Western Gulf Forest Tree Improvement Program, College Station, Tex.

    Google Scholar 

  • South D. B., Boyer J. N. and Bosch L. 1985. Survival and growth of loblolly pine as influenced by seedling grade: 13-year results. South. J. Appl. For. 9(2): 76–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • South D. B., Larsen H. S., Boyer J. N. and Williams H. M. 1990. Effect of seed spacing on seedling biomass on root growth potential of loblolly pine (Pinus taeda). New Forests 4: 179–192.

    Google Scholar 

  • South, D. B. and Mexal, J. G. 1984. Growing the “best” seedling for reforestation success. Ala. Agric. Exp. Stn. Forestry Dept. Series # 12. 11 p.

  • South, D. B., Mexal, J. G. and van Buijtenen, J. P. 1989. The relationship between seedling diameter at planting and long term volume growth of loblolly pine seedlings in East Texas, pp. 192–199. In: Proc. 10th North American Forest Biology Workshop. Vancouver, British Columbia.

  • South D. B. and Stumpff N. J. 1990. Root stripping reduces root growth potential of loblolly pine seedlings. South. J. Appl. For. 14: 196–199.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sprinz, P. T. 1987. Effects of genetically improved stands on growth and yield principles, pp. 228–348. In: Proc. 19th Southern Forest Tree Improvement Conference, College Station, Tex.

  • Stumpff N. J. and South D. B. 1991. Benomyl root dips adversely affect firest-year performance of stored loblolly pine seedlings. South. J. Appl. For. 15: 133–137.

    Google Scholar 

  • Switzer G. L. and Nelson L. E. 1963. Effects of nursery fertility and density on seedling characteristics, yield, and field performance of loblolly pine (Pinus taeda L.). Soil Science Soc. of America. Proc. 27 (4): 461–464.

    Google Scholar 

  • Talbert, J. T. 1982. One generation of loblolly pine tree improvement: results and challenges, pp. 106–120. In: Pollard, D. F. W., Edwards, D. G. and Yeatman (Eds) Proc. 18th Canadian Tree Improvement Association Part 2. August 17–20, 1981. Duncan, British Columbia.

  • Vardaman J. M. 1989. How to make money growing trees. John Wiley & Sons, New York, N.Y. 296 p.

    Google Scholar 

  • Venator C. R. 1983. First-year survival of morphologically graded loblolly pine seedlings in central Louisiana. tree Planters' Notes 34(4): 34–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wakeley P. C. 1935. Artificial reforestation in the southern pine region. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. USDA Tech. Bull. 492 115 p.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wakeley P. C. 1949. Physiological grades of southern pine nursery stock, pp. 311–323. In: Shirley H. L. (Ed). Proc. of the 1948 Society of American Foresters Annual Meeting. Society of American Foresters, Washington, D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wakeley P. C. 1954. Planting the southern pines. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. USDA Agric. Monogr. No. 18. 233 p.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wakeley P. C. 1969. Results of southern pine planting experiments established in the middle twenties. Jour. For. 67: 237–241.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ward D. and Johnson T. N. 1986. Determination of optimum seedling bed density for bare-root Honduras Caribbean pine, pp. 118–125. In: South D. B. (Ed) Proc. International Symposium on Nursery Management Practices for the Southern Pines. Ala. Agric. Exp. Sta., Auburn University, Ala.

    Google Scholar 

  • White J. B. 1981. The influence of seedling size and length of storage on longleaf pine survival. Tree Planters' Notes 32(4): 3–4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilder-Ayers, J. A. and Toliver, J. R. 1987. Relationships of morphological root and shoot characteristics to the performance of outplanted bareroot and containerized seedlings of loblolly pine, pp. 206–211. In: Proc. 4th Biennial Southern Silvicultural Research Conference. USDA Forest Serv. Gen. Tech. Rep. SE-42.

  • Xydias, G. K. 1981. Plantation survival studies of continental forest industries, pp. 8–15. In: Proc. 1st Biennial Southern Silvicultural Research Conference. USDA Forest Serv. Gen. Tech. Rep. SO-34.

  • Young C. 1981. Open-root nursery techniques and planting methods. South African Forestry J. 117: 68–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zobel B. J. and Talbert J. T. 1984. Applied Forest Tree Improvement. John Wiley & Sons, New York. 505 p.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Forestry and Alabama Agricultural Experiment Station, Auburn University, 36849-5418, Alabama, USA

    David B. South

Authors
  1. David B. South
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

South, D.B. Rationale for growing southern pine seedlings at low seedbed densities. New Forest 7, 63–92 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00037473

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00037473

Key words

Search

Navigation