Ponderosa Pine Family Growth Comparisons in the Central Great Plains of Kansas

doi:10.4236/ojf.2011.12004

Paper Menu >>

Journal Menu >>

Open Journal of Forestry

2011. Vol.1, No.2, 27-30

Ponderosa Pine Family Growth Comparisons

in the Central Great Plains of Kansas

Wayne A. Geye*, Keith D. Lynch

1Division of Forestry, Kansas State University, Manhattan, USA

Email: *[email protected]

Received September 7th, 2011; revised October 5th, 2011; accepted October 13th, 2011.

Ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa Laws.) has been planted widely in the Great Plains. Recommendations based

on a 1968 study were to use material from south central South Dakota and north central Nebraska. A second test

to further delineate seed sources (provenance/families) in this region was established in 1986. This paper reports

results for survival, height, diameter, and D2H measurements in Kansas at 15 years. Results identify a wide

range of suitable families within the Great Plains region. A majority of the tested sources performed well espe-

cially those from central Nebraska. Those sources from eastern Montana and western Nebraska performed

poorly where environmental or geographic conditions were the poorest, thus verifying the original recommenda-

tions.

Keywords: Ponderosa Pine, Pinus Pon de rosa, Provenance, Seed Sources, Tree Selectio n, Growth Characteristics

Introduction

Ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa Laws) is an important

component of the windbreak agroforestry system in the Great

Plains. Its drought tolerance, dense crown form, and tall growth

habit make ponderosa pine excellent for windbreaks, sight bar-

riers, and ornamental plantings (Flint, 1983).It is one of the few

tall trees that grow in the region and also provides full year-

round protection to fields and farmsteads because of its ever-

green nature (Schaefer & Baer, 1985).The natural range of

ponderosa pine extends from British Columbia, Canada, south-

ward into northern Mexico and from California eastward into

the Great Plains, except for Kansas (Crichfield & Little, 1966).

It has been widely planted in the plains region, but has shown

inconsistent performance.

Western pine tip moth (Rhyacioniabushnelli) has caused

widespread damage in the plains (Kopp et al., 1987), but out-

standing performance of some individual trees in the plains

plantations suggests that proper selection could improve tree

quality.

Early studies determined that trees grown from seed col-

lected from the northeastern range of ponderosa pine performed

best in most of the provenance test plantations (Deneke & Read

1975; Baer & Collins 1979; Read, 1983; Schaefer & Baer, 1985,

1992; Van Haverbeke, 1986). Also, 6-year datafrom a Kansas

plantation showed that early growth appeared to be clinally

related to elevation of seed provenances (Deneke & Read,

1975). Therefore, plains nurseries have focused much of their

ponderosa pine production on seed collections near Ainsworth

and Valentine, Nebraska, and Rosebud, South Dakota. In addi-

tion, trees from Jordan, Montana, performed well in more than

half of the early plantations (Read, 1983).

In 1986, a second cooperative ponderosa pine study was ini-

tiated by the GP-13 Technical Committee of the Great Plains

Agricultural Council in cooperation with the North Central and

Rocky Mountain Forest Experiment Stations. The intent of the

study was to more intensively sample recommended prove-

nances identified in the 1968 study. Collection origins are

shown in Figure 1. Nine progeny tests were established in Sas-

katchewan Canada, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota,

Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas, and Minnesota. This pa-

per reports data from the Kansas tests. This paper reports data

from the South Dakota, Nebraska, and Kansas tests. No addi-

tional tree improvement studies have been initiated in the

United States since this effort. Recently in Argentina (Meier et

al., 2004) a genetic tree improvement effort was initiated with

intention to established seed orchards in Patagonia. Tree im-

provement studies have attributed approximately 2% of the

total variation to differences among geographic locations in the

Southwestern United States (Yow et al.). One generation of tree

improvement may lead to gains in yield of 1% - 15% or reduce

rotations by 1 years - 20 years in ponderosa pine in the Inland

Empire Tree Improvement Cooperative in the northern Rockies

of the United States (Hamilton et al., 1994).

Materials and Methods

The tree plantation reported here used seedlings representing

75open-pollinated families from 13 geographic provenances

Figure 1.

Means of growth characteristics of the 10 ten and bottom 10 families in

the kansas.

W. A. GEYE ET AL.

(Table 1) and were planted in an individual tree factorial plant-

ing design with 8 replications at 3.7 m × 3.7 m (12 × 12 ft) in

Kansas for total of 1167 trees. Spacing within each replication

was represented by five trees in single-tree, noncontiguous plots.

Two border rows surrounded the plantation. Weeds were con-

trolled by cultivation for the first 3 years. The Kansas plantation

was near Milford Lake, Kansas, on an alluvial sandy loam site.

Superior height growth potential can be accurately identified at

an early age (i.e., 5 to 15years; Lambeth, 1980; Read, 1983; Van

Haverbeke, 1986; Schaefer & Baer, 1992). In this analysis, data

were also analyzed separatel y for the plantation.

Analysis consisted of ANOVA using the GLM procedure of

SAS (SAS Institute, 2003) for height, trunk diameter, and D2H

(a measure of trunk volume—volume index); Duncan’s multi-

ple range test for mean separation; andchi-square for survival.

In addition, correlations were determined among height, di-

ameter, D2H, and latitude and longitude. Seventy five seed

sources (families) were compared. Most of the sources were

from north central Nebraska and southern South Dakota (Table 1).

Results and Discussion

Fifteen-year survival and growth of the top 25% were from

four provenances 757, 990, 994, and 996; generally at the edge

of its natural range. Tests of effects are shown in Table 2 for di-

eter, height, and D2H. Family performance differed signify-

ntly (<1%) level across the plantation (Table 3).Means for the

top 10, mean, and bottom 10 are shown in Figure 1. Replicates

were significant at the <1% level and interactions were mixed.

No winter dieback or diseases were detected. Similar results in

a 28 plantation study in the Canada and the United States

showednorth central Nebraska sources were best as reported

from a greater study (Read 1983).

Survival

Survival after 15 growing seasons was good for all of the 75

families compared. The mean survival of all families was

86.4% with a range of 38.1% to 100%. The top 10 families are

as follows: 99010, 72005, 72109, 75713, 99001, 99010, 99201,

99404, 99506, 99613. All are from the north central part of

Nebraska. Most families had 100% survival. The five poorest

families were far western sources from Jordan, Montana and

one from South Dakota at 48.1%.They were significantly dif-

ferent (<1% level) from the other families. The other 74 sources

were not. A similar test at age 10 among provenances showed

720 and 721 (central Nebraska) with 72 and 82 percent survival

in the Northern Great Plains (Read 1983).

Diameter

The mean diameter was13.0 cm (6.0 in.)with a range from

17.2 cm - 5.3 cm (2.1 to 6.8 n). Mean diameters of the top 10

and bottom 10 families (Table 2) were 15.7 and 8.9 cm (6.2 and

3.4 in), respectively. Families from the 720 and 721 prove an-

ces were among the best. A similar test at age 10 among prove-

nces showed 720 and 721 (central Nebraska) were the best in

the Northern Great Plains (Read 1983).The largest 59 families

were not significantly different ranging from 17.2 to 14.1 cm

(6.8 to 4.9 in). Five families (provenance 811) from Jordan,

Montana, had significantly smaller diameters than the other

families (where environmental factors were poor having very

low precipitation and low annual temperatures), whereas di-

ameters of the poorest 10 families were significantly smaller

than those of the best (Table 3).Trees with the largest diameters

had the tallest heights (r = 0.77096 at the 1% level).

Table 1.

Collection zones (provenances) of ponderosa p ine seed sources.

Geographic

origin(#) Tree additio ns

(families)( #) Local area

(town/state) Annual prec ipi ta-

tion((mm )(in)) Annual mean

temp. C0 (F0) Elevation

m (ft) Latitude

(0N) Longitude

(0W)

720 02 - 11 Ainsworth NE 579 (22.8) 8.6 (47.6) 780 (2560) 42.59 100.00

721 01 - 11 Valentine NE 495 (19.5) 8.4 (47.2) 8 00 (2625) 42.88 100.55

757 01 - 40 Rosebud SD 955 (37.6) 8.5 (47.7) 850 (2789) 43.25 100.82

811 13,15 - 16,19,22 Jordan MT 327 (12.9) 6.9 (44.5) 808 (2625) 47.31 106.89

990 01 - 10 Springview NE 5 73 (22.7) 8.3 (47.0) 740 (2428) 42.82 99.75

991 01 - 05 Kilgore NE 516 (20.3) 8.3 (47.0) 800 (2625) 42.94 100.97

992 01 - 04 Drinkwater NE 495 (19.5) 8.3 (47.0) 859 (2800) 42.47 101.07

993 01 - 07 Nenzel NE 526 (20.3) 9.0(48.3) 950 (3117) 42.93 101.11

994 01 - 05 Bassett NE 635 (25.0) 9.0 (48.3) 71 0 ( 2329) 42.60 99.54

995 01 - 06 Snake Ri ver NE 495 (19.5) 8.3 (47.00 866 (2840) 42.71 100.97

996 01 - 14 Sparks NE 495 (19.5) 8.3 (47. 0) 800 (2625) 42.94 100.24

Table 2.

Test of source effects on 15-year-old ponderosa pine families.

Effect Pr > F

DF Diameter Height D2H

Family 74 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001

Replicate 5 0.0020 0.0436 0.1047

Family X replicate 345 0.02262 0.03992 0.2912

W. A. GEYE ET AL. 29

Table 3.

Ranking of the 10 top and bottom 10 families at 15 years in Kansas.

Survival Diameter Height D2H - - volume index

Family (%) Family cm (in) Family m (ft) Family Volume

Top 10 families

72004 100a 99010 17.2 (6.8a) 72109 6.0(19.6a) 72109 926a

72005 100a 72109 16.5 (6.5ab) 72103 5.8(19.1ab) 99010 906ab

72109 100a 99305 16.4 (6.5abc) 99101 5.8(18.9abc) 99305 815abc

75713 100a 96601 15.7 (6.2a-d) 72104 5.6(18.3a-d) 99006 698bcd

99001 100a 72004 15.2 (6.0a-f) 75710 5.5(18.2a-) 72004 687b-d

99010 100a 75710 15.2 (6.0a-f) 72004 5.5(18.2a-f) 75710 678b-f

99201 100a 75704 15.2 (6.0a-f) 99305 5.5(18.2a-f) 72104 676b-g

99404 100a 72104 15.0 (5.9a-f) 99404 5.5(18.1a-f) 72103 676c-g

99506 100a 99090 15.0 (5.9a-e) 99002 5.5(17.7a-h) 99008 647c-g

99613 100a 75707 15.0 (5.9a-e) 99405 5.4(17.5a-h) 72011 647fc-g

Bottom 10 f a milies

99102 71.4a-c 75719 10.7 (4.2o-s) 75719 4.3(14.0p-o) 75735 282p-x

81119 70.0a-d 75718 10.2 (4.0o-s) 75718 4.3(14.0p-o) 99501 240q-x

99006 68.8a-d 99501 9.9 (3.9p-s) 75735 4.2(13.7o-q) 99101 240q-x

99204 68.2a-d 99302 9.9 (3.9p-s) 99501 4.2(13.7n-q) 99302 235r-x

99502 63.6a-d 81113 9.9 (3.9p-s) 99302 4.1(13.5n-q) 75718 224t-x

81115 56.2b-d 99101 9.7 (3.8r-t) 81119 3.4(11.2r) 81113 187t-x

81116 50.0cd 81119 8.1 (3.2r-t) 81115 3.4(11.2r) 81115 180u-x

75718 50.0cd 81115 7.1 (2.8t-u) 81113 3.3(10.7r) 81119 155v-x

81122 38.9d 81116 6.9 (2.7u-v) 81116 3.1(10.3r) 81111 116w

81113 38.1d 81122 5.3 (2.1v) 81122 2.9((9.4r) 81112 80w

N 1167 1167 1167 1167

Mean 86.4 13.0 (6.0) 5.0 (16.5) 476

Sign. < 1% <1% <1% <1%

Range 38.1 - 100 5.3 - 17.2 (2.1 - 6.8) 2 .9 - 6.0 (9.4 - 19.6) 80-906

Height

The tallest families were from central Nebraska. They were

significantly different (<1% level) from the other families.

Mean height of all sources was 5.0 m (16.5 ft) with a range of

2.9 to 6.0 m (9.4 to 19.6 ft). The top 10 sources (Table 3) dif-

fered by 0.6m (2.13 ft). Five sources from Jordan, Montana,

(provenance 811) were significantly shorter than all of the re-

maining sources. The poorest 10families ranged in height from

2.9 to 4.3 m (9.4 to 14.0 ft) and were significantly shorter (1%

level) than the best 71. There were no significant differences in

height among the best 55 families.

A proceeding test to this one (Koop, 1987) using a much lar-

ger number of provenances found 720, 721 among the tallest

seedlings at four years. A provenance test in North Dakota in

1968 and 1969 (Van Deusen, 1980) with many of the same

provenances as in this study had similar results. At ages of 5

and 10 years, the best were 721, 757, 720. Many families from

provenances 720 and 721 were among the tallest in our study.

Ponderosa pine from this area should maintain height growth

superiority whenplanted in the central Plains States. Evidently

these sources contain genes endowing them with a broad range

of site tolerances (Read, 1983). Sources from lower elevations

grew faster as reported by others (Mirov et al., 1952; Callaham

& Hasel, 1961; Squillace & Silen, 1962; Hanover, 1963), but

we did not observe this trend.

D2H (Volume Index)

The trees with the greatest size were the same as found for

both diameter and height.

Volume index among sources, indicated by D2H value s, was

significantly different (1% level; Table 3). Mean D2H of all

sources was 476 units with a range from 80 to 926. The best 51

sources differed significantly from the shortest24.Five sources

from Jordan, Montana, were among the 10 sources with the

smallest volume.

Correlation Analysis

Environmental factors did not influence tree growth as there

was no strong relationship between annual precipitation and

temperatures or elevation, latitude, and longitude. Diameter,

height, and D2H values were highly significant; diameter and

height at 0.77096, and 0.9345with D2H while height was

0.8056 with D2H. Read (1983) and Schafer & Baer (1985) have

found a close relationship between juvenile-mature correlations.

W. A. GEYE ET AL.

Superior sources may be found at a fairly early age. Read (1983)

noted that 2- and 3-year-old seedlings from the NE-SD areas

among the tallest in his nursery study.

Summary and Conclusion

Fast-growing trees are desirable for establishment in the

Great Plains. Ponderosa pine is often planted in homestead and

field plantings in the Central and Northern Plains. Plains-wide

studies conducted in the 1960s showed that sources from south

central South Dakota and north central Nebraska were the best

planting material. The present study was conducted to test a

greater number of families to further refine selection areas for

ponderosa pine sources. Materials from 75 individual trees

were planted in the Central Plains sites for evaluation. Within

this relatively small area, analyses indicated that ponderosa

pine provenances affected growth of this 15-year-oldplantation.

The best families came from central Nebraska. Environmental

or geographic factors did not influence growth.

References

Baer, N, & Collins, P. (1979). Ten-year performance of a ponderosa

pine provenance study in eastern South Dakota. South Dakota State

University. Agricultural Experiment Station. TB- 52, Brookings, 6.

Callaham, R. Z., & Hasel, A. A. (1961). Pinus ponderosa height growt h

of wind-pollinated progenies. Silvae Ge net ica , 10, 32-42.

Critchfield, W. B., & Little, Jr. E. (1966). Geographic distribution of

the pines of the world .USDA. Miscellaneous Publication, 99, 97.

Flint, H. L. (1983). Landscape Plants for eastern North America (p.

677). New York: John Wi ley & Sons.

Deneke, F. J, & Read, R. A. (1957). Early survival and growth of pon-

derosa pine provenances in East-Central Kansas. USDA Forest Ser-

vice, Research Note RM-297, 4pp.

Hamiliton, D. A., & Rehfeldt, G. E. (1994). Using individual tree

growth projection models to estimate stand-level gains attributable to

genetically improved stock. Forest Ecology and Management, 68,

189-207. doi:10.1016/0378-1127(94)90045-0

Hanover, J. W. (1963). Geographic variation in ponderosa pine leader

growth. Forest Science, 9, 86-95.

Lambeth, C. C. (1980). Juvenile-mature correlations in Pineaceae and

implications or early selection. Forest Science, 26, 571-580.

Koop, R. F., Geyer, W. A., & Argent, R. M. (1987). Evaluation of

ponderosa pine seed sources for the eastern Great Plains. Journal

Arboriculture, 13, 139-144.

Read, R. (1983). Ten-year performance of ponderosa pine provenances

in the Great Plains of North America. USDA Forest Service Research

Paper 250, 17.

Meier Martinez, A., Mondino, V., & Gallo, L. (2004). Criteria for the

selection of plus trees of ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) and

Oregon pine (Pseudosugamenziesii) for the establishment of seed

orchards in the Andean Patagonia Region of Argentin. Sgapya Fore-

stal, 33, 2-9.

Mirov, N. T., Dufield, J. W., & Liddicoet, A. R. (1952). Altitudinal

races of Pinus ponderosa—A 12-year progress report. Journal of

Forestry, 50, 825-831.

SAS Institute Inc. (2004). SAS 2002-2003 SAS/STAT User’s guide.

Version 9.1. Cary NC: SAS Institute Inc.

Schaffer, P. R., & Baer, W. (1985). Ponderosa pine provenance for

windbreaks in eastern South Dakota.North. Journal of Forestry, 2,

105-107.

Schaffer, P. R., & Baer, N. W. (1992). Stability of ponderosa pine

provenance: results after 21 years in eastern South Dakota. Northern

Journal of Forestry, 9, 102-107.

Squillace, A. E., & Silen, R. (1962). Racial variation in ponderosa pine.

Forest Science Monograph, 2, 27.

Van Deusen, J. L. (1980). Ponderosa pine provenances for the northern

Great Plains. USDA Forest Service, Research Paper RM-223, 8.

Van Haverbeke, D. (1986). Genetic variation in ponderosa pine: A

15-year test of provenances in the Great Plains. USDA Forest Service

Rocky Mountain Forest Range Experiment Station Research Paper

80526, 16.

Yow, T. H., Wagner, M. R., Wommack, D. E., & Tuskan, G. A. (1992).

Influence of selection for volume growth on the genetic-variability of

southwestern ponderosa pine. Silvae Genetica, 41, 326-333.