S TAND D YNAMICS A ND D ISTURBANCE H ISTORY I N A M IXED H ARDWOOD F OREST, S IMES T RACT, H ARVARD...

STAND DYNAMICS AND DISTURBANCE HISTORY IN A MIXED HARDWOOD FOREST, SIMES TRACT, HARVARD FOREST, MA

NADEF 2009 Stand Dynamics GroupGroup Leaders: Saskia L. van de Gevel1 and Chris Gentry2

Group Members: Stella Cousins3, Jeff Dech4, Mike Reinikainen5, Chris Guiterman6, Stacy Birch6, John Waldron7, Eli Martinson8, Grant Harley9, Benjamin Hook10, Rob Morrissey11, Soung-Ryoul Ryu12, April

Sahara13

1Appalachian State University, 2Austin Peay State University, 3Yale F&ES, 4Nipissing University, 5University of Minnesota, 6University of Maine, 7University of West Florida, 8Kansas State University, 9University of Tennessee, 10Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, 11Purdue University,

12Clemson University, 13 Humboldt State University

1. Create 100-year-old white ash and white pine chronologies

2. Examine vertical forest structure

3. Determine age-structure and project future forest successional trends

4. Investigate land-use history and compare to modern forest

OBJECTIVES

• Harvard Forest –Simes tract

• 125 ha secondary mixed hardwood forest

• Transitional zone - northern and central mixed hardwood forest types

STUDY AREA

• Rock Walls

• 1775 - 1825• Rapid Deforestation

• Frost Heaving• Sediment Transport• Changes in Surficial

Geology & Geomorphology

Rock wall, Simes Tract, Harvard Forest, MA

BACKGROUND: LAND USE HISTORY

Before 1740Native American

Fire & Subsistence

Farming

1930 -1973Olive SimesOccasional

Timber Harvest

1922 – 1929Held in Trust

1891-1922William Simes

Farm Abandoned, Recreation

1884-1891Elmer Towne

Active Farming

1830-1880John Towne

Height of Forest Clearance; Farming

1973 – PresentHarvard Forest

BACKGROUND: LAND USE HISTORY

•Hurricanes: 19381944195419601985

•Gypsy moth:1981

•Ice storms: 19421998?

•Chestnut 1910-blight: 1913

BACKGROUND: NATURAL DISTURBANCE

• A circular 0.05 ha plot (12.66 m radius)

• Trees (≥ 10 cm dbh)

• species, crown class, dbh

• Saplings (<10 cm dbh, ≥1 m height)

• tallied by species

METHODS: FIELD

Mike and Soung delineate a plot boundary.

• Tree cores

• At least two cores per tree

•Sampled near tree base

• Additional trees sampled adjacent to the plot; white ash (n=21) and white pine (n=24)

• Stems mapped

METHODS: FIELD

Grant and Jeff core a white pine (Pinus strobus)

• Sample preparation

• (Stokes and Smiley, 1968)

• Crossdating• Listed marker rings

• Skeleton plot• Measurement

• Master chronology

METHODS: LAB

RESULTS: IMPORTANCE VALUES

3%

10%

9%

23%

54%

black cherry

red maple

red oak

sugar maple

white pine

RESULTS: SAPLING COUNT

4

4

6

2

1

3

RED MAPLE

SUGAR MAPLE

HOPHORNBEAM

WHITE PINE

STRIPED MAPLE

WITCHHAZEL

Suppressed Intermediate Codominant Dominant0

50

100

150

200

250

300

black cherry red maple red oak sugar maple white pine

Canopy Class

Tree

s (p

er H

a)RESULTS: CANOPY CLASS

RESULTS: CROWN DISTRIBUTION

Plot radius = 12.66 m

White Pine Sugar Maple

Red Maple Black Cherry

Red Oak

Crown Area of Individuals (>10 cm dbh)(by crown class)

12.5 17.5 22.5 27.5 32.5 37.5 42.5 47.5 52.5 57.50

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

white pine sugar maple red maple black cherry red oak

DBH mid-point interval (cm)

Tree

s (p

er H

a)RESULTS: DIAMETER AT BREAST HEIGHT

RESULTS: ESTABLISHMENT

1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 19700

10

20

30

40

50

60 black cherry

red maple

red oak

sugar maple

white pine

Inner Date

DBH

(cm

)

RESULTS: SKELETON PLOTS

Marker Year Shared by both Species

1944*

1949

1959

1970

1981**

1999

* Hurricane (D’Amato and Orwig 2008)** Possible Gypsy Moth (Liebhold et al. 2000)

RESULTS: COFECHA

  Eastern White Pine White AshNumber of trees 24 21Number of dated series 38 37Master series time span 112 111Total rings in all series 2904 3065Series intercorrelation 0.510 0.543

Mean sensitivity 0.269 0.188Series start date* 1898 1909Percent Flags 19.5 14.3

* Chronology year with 2 or more series

RESULTS: WHITE PINE CHRONOLOGY

1 5 9 13 17 21 25 29 33 37 41 45 49 53 57 61 65 69 73 77 81 85 89 93 97 1011051090

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

N COFECHA STD ARS RES

RESULTS: WHITE ASH CHRONOLOGY

1 5 9 13 17 21 25 29 33 37 41 45 49 53 57 61 65 69 73 77 81 85 89 93 97 1011051090

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

N COFECHA STD ARS RES

RESULTS: WHITE PINE CLIMATE CORRELATIONSN

ov. T

empe

ratu

re

Pre

viou

s A

ug T

empe

ratu

re

Sum

mer

Pre

cipi

tatio

n

July

PD

SI

Aug

ust P

DS

I

Aug

ust P

HD

I

Sep

tem

ber

PH

DI

-0.40

-0.30

-0.20

-0.10

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

RESULTS: WHITE ASH CLIMATE CORRELATIONSJu

n. T

empe

ratu

re

Aug.

Tem

pera

ture

Sum

mer

Tem

pera

ture

Prev

ious

Sum

mer

Tem

pera

ture

Prev

ious

Jun.

Tem

pera

ture

Annu

al P

reci

pita

tion

Mar

ch P

DSI

April

PD

SI

May

PD

SI

Nov

embe

r PD

SI

Annu

al A

vera

ge P

DSI

Gro

win

g Se

ason

PD

SI

Mar

ch P

HD

I

May

PH

DI

Nov

embe

r PH

DI

Annu

al A

vera

ge P

HD

I

Gro

win

g Se

ason

PH

DI

Prev

ious

Mar

ch P

HD

I

-0.4

-0.3

-0.2

-0.1

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

RESULTS: WHITE PINE EVENT ANALYSIS

-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4

-0.3

-0.2

-0.1

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

Years

Depa

rtur

e

RESULTS: SPECIES GROWTH RESPONSE ANALYSIS (JOLTS)

1930

1935

1940

1945

1950

1955

1960

1965

1970

1975

1980

1985

1990

1995

2000

2005

0

20

40

60

80

100

Running Mean = 10 yr , Interval = 0 yr

1930

1935

1940

1945

1950

1955

1960

1965

1970

1975

1980

1985

1990

1995

2000

2005

020406080

100

Running Mean = 5 yr, Interval = 0 yr

0

20

40

60

80

100

Running Mean = 10 yr, Interval = 5yr

1930

1935

1940

1945

1950

1955

1960

1965

1970

1975

1980

1985

1990

1995

2000

2005

0

20

40

60

80

100

Running Mean = 5 yr, Interval = 5 yr

1930

1935

1940

1945

1950

1955

1960

1965

1970

1975

1980

1985

1990

1995

2000

2005

0

20

40

60

80

100

Running Mean = 10yr, Interval = 10 yr

1930

1935

1940

1945

1950

1955

1960

1965

1970

1975

1980

1985

1990

1995

2000

2005

0

20

40

60

80

100

Running Mean = 5yr, Interval = 10 yr

Release: Major Moderate Minor

RESULTS: WHITE PINE GROWTH RESPONSES

19301935

19401945

19501955

19601965

19701975

19801985

19901995

20002005

-100

-80

-60

-40

-20

0

MinorModerateMajor

0

20

40

60

80

100

MinorModerateMajor

Release

Suppression

Mean method: Nowacki and Abrams (1997)

0

20

40

60

80

100

MinorModerateMajor

RESULTS: WHITE PINE GROWTH RESPONSES

Release

Suppression

19301935

19401945

19501955

19601965

19701975

19801985

19901995

20002005

-100-80-60-40-20

0

Minor

Moderate

Major

Median method: Rubino and McCarthy (2004)

RESULTS: WHITE ASH GROWTH REPONSES

Release

Suppression

Mean method: Nowacki and Abrams (1997)

19301935

19401945

19501955

19601965

19701975

19801985

19901995

20002005

-100

-80

-60

-40

-20

0

MinorModerateMajor

0

20

40

60

80

100

MinorModerateMajor

Mean-method

0

20

40

60

80

100

MinorModerateMajor

RESULTS: WHITE ASH GROWTH RESPONSES

Release

Suppression

-100

-80

-60

-40

-20

0

MinorModerateMajor

Median method: Rubino and McCarthy (2004)

1. No trend between size and age (oldest tree=red maple)

2. Stand composition: Forest currently in stage of reinitiation

3. Changing composition: increase in shade tolerant species

4. No major recruitment 1970–2010; no recruitment of white pine in understory above 2 m

5. Stand susceptible to damage; certain species poised to take over positions within canopy

DISCUSSION / CONCLUSIONS

6. Although many natural disturbances, some absent from record

7. Both species: growth positively correlated with disturbance events

• 1944 and 1981

8. White pine responded more to drought

• White ash experienced release during drought that suppressed white pine

9. Differences in mean vs. median method of identifying growth responses

10. White oak codominant in adjacent areas; may enter dominant class in future

DISCUSSION / CONCLUSIONS

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We thank the following:• Jim Speer, PhD (Indiana State University)• Larry Winship, PhD (Hampshire College)• Dave Orwig, PhD (Harvard Forest, Harvard

University)

QUESTIONS?

RAYNN

Graphic by Krista Phillips