Record Details

Two-year field performance of lodgepole pine seedlings: Effects of container type, mycorrhizal fungal inoculants, and site preparation

Journal of Ecosystems and Management

View Archive Info
 
 
Field Value
 
Title Two-year field performance of lodgepole pine seedlings: Effects of container type, mycorrhizal fungal inoculants, and site preparation
 
Creator Campbell, D. Bruce
Jones, Melanie D.
Kiiskila, Steven
Bulmer, Chuck
 
Subject container type; Copperblock™; AirBlock™; Styroblock™; ectomycorrhizae; inoculation; lodgepole pine; landing rehabilitation; forest floor planting
 
Description Interior lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta var. latifolia) seedlings were grown in Styroblocks™, Copperblocks™, or AirBlocks™, and inoculated with Rhizopogon rubescens or Hebeloma longicaudum, or left as noninoculated controls. Seedlings were planted into different rooting environments in two separate locations, encompassing two separate experiments. In experiment 1, seedlings were planted into fully rehabilitated landings (ripped with burn-pile debris and topsoil incorporated), ripped landings, and unprepared cutblocks in the spring. In experiment 2, seedlings were planted in a cutblock in manually screefed (i.e., boot screefed) planting sites or undisturbed forest floor planting sites in the summer. Seedlings in the fully rehabilitated landings were 21% taller, had 45% larger diameters, and were more vigorous than seedlings in landings that were simply ripped; seedlings planted in the unprepared cutblock were taller, but with a smaller diameter, than those on the rehabilitated landings. Seedlings in screefed microsites grew significantly larger (5%) than seedlings planted directly in the forest floor. After 2 years in the field, the sizes of spring-planted, noninoculated seedlings, and seedlings inoculated with ectomycorrhizal fungi were not significantly different. Inoculated summer-planted seedlings were approximately 5% larger than non-inoculated control seedlings. Among the variables we manipulated, planting environment had the greatest influence on seedling growth.
 
Publisher Canadian Institute for Studies in Publishing Press
 
Contributor —
 
Date 2004-03-24
 
Type info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
Peer-reviewed Article
 
Format application/pdf
 
Identifier http://jem-online.org/index.php/jem/article/view/266
 
Source Journal of Ecosystems and Management; Vol 3, No 2 (2004)
 
Language eng
 
Relation http://jem-online.org/index.php/jem/article/view/266/185