Reforestation Costs can be decreased by lowering initial stocking and outplanting morphologically improved seedlings

References

1. 1. Bennett FA.

   1969. Spacing and slash pine quality timber production. Asheville (NC): USDA Forest Service. General Research Paper SE-53. 9 p.
2. 1. Biblis EJ,
   2. Carino HF.

   2002.Valuation of destructively tested dimension lumber from 25-, 30-, 35-, 40-, and 50-year-old loblolly pine plantation stands. Forest Products Journal 52(2):74–78.

   OpenUrl
3. 1. Blake JI,
   2. South DB.

   1991. Planting morphologically improved seedlings with shovels. Auburn University (AL): Alabama Agricultural Experiment Station. Forestry School Series No. 13. 7 p.
4. 1. Caulfield JP,
   2. South DB,
   3. Boyer JN.

   1987.Nursery seedbed density is determined by short-term or long-term objectives. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry 11:9–14.

   OpenUrl
5. 1. Clark A,
   2. Saucier JR.

   1989. Influence of initial planting density, geographic location, and species on juvenile wood formation in southern pine. Forest Products Journal 39(7/8):42–48.

   OpenUrl
6. 1. Clark A,
   2. McAlister RH,
   3. Saucier JR,
   4. Reitter K.

   1996. Effect of rotation age on lumber grade, yield, and strength of unthinned loblolly pine. Forest Products Journal 46:63–69.

   OpenUrl
7. 1. Clason TR.

   1989. Stocking control measures affect individual pine growth and development. In: Miller J, compiler. Proceedings, fifth biennial southern silvicultural research conference; 1988 Nov 1–3; Memphis, TN. New Orleans (LA): USDA Forest Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station. General Technical Report SO-074. p 205–210.
8. 1. Dubois MR,
   2. Straka TJ,
   3. Crim SD,
   4. Robinson LJ.

   2003. Costs and cost trends for forestry practices in the South. Forest Landowner 62(2):3–9.

   OpenUrl
9. 1. Hafley WL,
   2. Buford MA.

   1985.A bivariate model for growth and yield prediction. Forest Science 31:237–247.

   OpenUrl
10. 1. Maclaren P.

    1993. Radiata pine growers’ manual. Rotorua, New Zealand: New Zealand Forest Research Institute Limited. 140 p.
11. 1. Megraw RA.

    1985.Wood quality factors in loblolly pine.Atlanta (GA):Tappi Press. 88 p.
12. 1. Mize CW,
    2. Schultz RC.

    1985. Comparing treatment means correctly and appropriately. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 15:1142–1148.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
13. 1. Moorhead DJ,
    2. Dangerfield CW,
    3. Edwards MB.

    1998. Regulating stand density by precommercial thinning in natural regenerated loblolly pine stands: evaluation of management and economic alternatives. In: Waldrop TA, compiler. Proceedings, ninth biennial southern silvicultural research conference; 1997 February 25–27; Clemson, SC. Asheville (NC): USDA Forest Service, Southern Research Station. General Technical Report SRS-20. p 202–204.
14. 1. Nebeker TE,
    2. Hodges JD,
    3. Karr BK,
    4. Moehring DM.

    1985. Thinning practices in southern pines—with pest management recommendations. New Orleans (LA): USDA Forest Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station. Technical Bulletin 1703. 36 p.
15. 1. Rowan SJ.

    1986. Seedbed density affects performance of slash and loblolly pine in Georgia. In: South DB, editor. Proceedings, international symposium on nursery management practices for the southern pines; 1985 Aug 4–9; Montgomery, AL. Auburn University (AL): Alabama Agricultural Experiment Station. p 126–135.
16. 1. SAS Institute Inc.

    1989.SAS/STAT user’s guide.Version 6 ed.Cary (NC):SAS Institute Inc. 846 p.
17. 1. Shipman RD.

    1964. Low seedbed densities can improve early height growth of planted slash and loblolly pine seedlings. Journal of Forestry 62:814–817.

    OpenUrl
18. 1. Shoulders E.

    1961. Effect of nursery bed density on loblolly and slash pine seedlings. Journal of Forestry 59:576–579.

    OpenUrl
19. 1. South DB.

    1993. Rationale for growing southern pine seedlings at low seedbed densities. New Forests 7:63–92.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
20. 1. South DB.

    2000. Planting morphologically improved pine seedlings to increase survival and growth. Auburn University (AL): Alabama Agricultural Experiment Station. Forestry and Wildlife Research Series No. 1. 12 p.
21. 1. South DB.

    2003. “Correct” planting density for loblolly pine depends on your objectives and who you ask. Forest Landowner 62(2):46–51.

    OpenUrl
22. 1. South DB,
    2. Rakestraw JL.

    2002. Results of a loblolly pine seedling-grade by genotype study. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry 26:153–158.

    OpenUrl
23. 1. South DB,
    2. Rakestraw JL.

    2004. Large-diameter seedlings: a method of reducing chemical use in some pine plantations. Journal of Sustainable Forestry 18(4):47–58.

    OpenUrl
24. 1. South DB,
    2. Boyer JN,
    3. Bosch L.

    1985. Survival and growth of loblolly pine as influenced by seedling grade:13-year results. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry 9:76–81.

    OpenUrl
25. 1. South DB,
    2. Zwolinski JB,
    3. Allen HL.

    1995. Economic returns from enhancing loblolly pine establishment on two upland sites: effects of seedling grade, fertilization, hexazinone, and intensive soil cultivation. New Forests 10:239–256.

    OpenUrl
26. 1. South DB,
    2. Rakestraw JL,
    3. Lowerts GA.

    2001. Early gains from planting large-diameter seedlings and intensive management are additive for loblolly pine. New Forests 22:97–110.

    OpenUrl
27. 1. Switzer GL,
    2. Nelson LE.

    1963. Effects of nursery fertility and density on seedling characteristics, yield, and field performance of loblolly pine (Pinus taeda L.).Soil Science Society of America 27(4):461–464.

    OpenUrl
28. 1. [USDA NRCS] USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service.

    2004. The PLANTS database, version 3.5. URL: http://plants.usda.gov (accessed 15 Nov 2004). Baton Rouge (LA): National Plant Data Center.
29. 1. Van Dusen PC,
    2. Sullivan AD,
    3. Matney TG.

    1981.A prediction system for cubic foot volume of loblolly pine applicable through much of its range. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry 5:186–189.

    OpenUrl