International Journal of Forestry Research / 2012 / Article / Tab 1

Research Article

Yield Responses of Black Spruce to Forest Vegetation Management Treatments: Initial Responses and Rotational Projections

Table 1

Relative yield responses and associated experimental details ordered by number of sequential treatments , initial year of treatment application relative to the year of seedling establishment ( (yr)); and length of the observation period relative to the year of seedling establishment ( (yr)).

a a aRelative responseb Source and treatment details
(yr)(yr)
(%)(%)(%)(%)

1−14734333910Tables 1 and  2 and Figures 1, 4(b), and 6(b) as reported by Pitt et al. [18]; mean responses based on bareroot and container stock-types combined results; treatment = hexazinone (Velpar L) at 4 kg ai/ha (liquid formulation); effectiveness = reduction of 20% and 1% in herbaceous and woody vegetation cover, respectively, relative to untreated control plots, at time of last remeasurement.
1−1467608Tables  1 and  2 and Figures  1(a,b) and 4(b,d) as reported by Reynolds and Roden [19]; mean responses based on spring and fall combined results; treatment = hexazinone (Velpar L) at 2 kg ai/ha (liquid formulation); effectiveness = reduction of 44% in red raspberry (Rubus idaeus L. var. strigosus (Michx.) Maxim.) (major competitor) cover, relative to untreated control plots, at time of last remeasurement.
1−14574829Tables  1 and  2 and Figures  1(a,b), and 4(b,d) as reported by Reynolds and Roden [19]; mean responses based on spring and fall combined results; treatment = hexazinone (PRONONE 10 G) at 2 kg ai/ha (granular formulation); effectiveness = reduction of 38% in red raspberry (major competitor) cover, relative to untreated control plots, at time of last remeasurement.
1−14314326Tables  1 and  2 and Figures  1(a,b) as reported by Reynolds and Roden [20]; mean responses based on spring and fall combined results; treatment = sulfonylurea (Metsulfuron (ESCORT)) at 72 g ai/ha (liquid formulation); effectiveness = reduction of 47% in red raspberry (major competitor) cover, relative to untreated control plots, at time of last remeasurement.
1−151006348Tables  2 and  3 as reported by Wood and von Althen [21]; mean responses based on bareroot and container stock-types combined results; treatment = glyphosate (Roundup) at 2 kg ai/ha (liquid formulation); effectiveness = reductions of 20% and 25% in herbaceous and woody vegetation cover, respectively, relative to the untreated control plots, at time of last remeasurement.
1058735−5Tables  1 and  2 and Figures  2(b,d) as reported by Reynolds and Roden [19]; mean responses based on spring and fall combined results; treatment = hexazinone (Velpar L) at 2 kg ai/ha (liquid formulation); effectiveness = reduction of 44% in red raspberry (major competitor) cover, relative to untreated control plots, at time of last remeasurement.
1055325−27Tables  1 and  2 and Figures  2(a,c) as reported by Reynolds and Roden [19]; mean responses based on spring and fall combined results; treatment = hexazinone (PRONONE 10 G) at 2 kg ai/ha (granular formulation); effectiveness = reduction of 38% in red raspberry (major competitor) cover, relative to untreated control plots, at time of last remeasurement.
1054723−38Tables  1 and  2 and Figures  2(a,b) as reported by Reynolds and Roden [20]; treatment = sulfonylurea (Sulfometuron (OUST) at 300 g ai/ha (liquid formulation); effectiveness = reduction of 57% in red raspberry (major competitor) cover, relative to untreated control plots, at time of last remeasurement.
10520−15Tables  1 and  2 and Figure  1(a) as reported by Reynolds and Roden [20]; treatment = sulfonylurea (Metsulfuron (ESCORT) at 72 g ai/ha (liquid formulation); effectiveness = reduction of 47% in red raspberry (major competitor) cover, relative to untreated control plots, at time of last remeasurement.
1053515112Table  1 as reported by Sutherland et al. [22] and Figure  1(d) as reported by Sutherland and Foreman [23]; treatment = hexazinone (Velpar L) at 3.1 kg ai/ha (liquid formulation); effectiveness = initial reduction of competing vegetation at time of treatment; however, based on a vegetation index metric (height × cover), competition (red raspberry and trembling aspen (Populus tremuloides Michx.) increased 40%, relative to the untreated control plots, at the time of last remeasurement.
1052619109−9Tables  1, 2, 3, and  4 as reported by Jobidon et al. [24]; results for chemical treatment at the Flynn experimental site; treatment = glyphosate (Vision) at 1.5 kg ai/ha (liquid formulation); untreated control plots dominated by red raspberry (63–75% cover) at time of establishment.
1054227204−4Tables  1, 2, 3, and  4 as reported by Jobidon et al. [24]: results for manual treatment at the Flynn experimental site; treatment = physical removal via hedge clipper; untreated control plots dominated by red raspberry (63–75% cover) at time of establishment.
1052713930Tables  1, 2, 3, and  4 as presented Jobidon et al. [24]; results for chemical treatment at the Joncas experimental site; treatment = glyphosate (Vision) at 1.6 kg ai/ha (liquid formulation); untreated control plots dominated by red raspberry (24–45% cover) at time of establishment.
1052414863Tables  1, 2, 3, and 4 as reported by Jobidon et al. [24]: results for manual treatment at the Joncas experimental site; treatment = physical removal via machete; untreated control plots dominated by red raspberry (24–45% cover) at time of establishment.
10545201042Tables  1, 2, 3, and 4 as reported by Jobidon et al. [24]; results for chemical treatment at the Pilote experimental site; treatment = glyphosate (Vision) at 1.6 kg ai/ha (liquid formulation); untreated control plots dominated by red raspberry (71–79% cover) at time of establishment.
10540239913Tables  1, 2, 3, and 4 as reported by Jobidon et al. [24]: results for manual treatment at the Pilote experimental site; treatment = physical removal via brush cutter; untreated control plots dominated by red raspberry (71–79% cover) at time of establishment.
105674112Tables  2 and 3 as reported by Wood and von Althen [21]; mean responses based on bareroot and container stock-types combined results; treatment = glyphosate (Roundup) at 2 kg ai/ha (liquid formulation); effectiveness = reductions of 10% and 42.5% in herbaceous and woody vegetation cover, respectively, relative to untreated control plots, at time of last remeasurement.
10568382735Table  2 and Figures  1, 4(a), and 6(a) as reported by Pitt et al. [18]; mean responses based on bareroot and container stock-types combined results; treatment = hexazinone (Velpar L) at 4 kg ai/ha (liquid formulation); effectiveness = reduction of 20% and 1% in herbaceous and woody vegetation cover, respectively, relative to untreated control plots, at time of last remeasurement.
1051713692Table  1 and Figure  2 as reported by Wagner et al. [25]; treatment = glyphosate (Vision) at 4 kg ai/ha (liquid formulation); effectiveness = reduction of 10% in herbaceous vegetation cover relative to the untreated control plots at the time of last remeasurement ( ., nil competition from woody species).
10101577Table  2 as reported by Jobidon and Charette [26]; results for Squatec experimental site; treatment = manual removable via pulling of all vegetation within 60 cm of subject trees; principal competitor species were removed (red raspberry and fireweed).
1010494020Table  4 as reported by Jobidon and Charette [26]; results for Lake Anna experimental site; treatment = mechanized manual removable via brush cutter of all vegetation within 60 cm of subject trees; principal competitor species were removed (shade intolerant deciduous trees).
1010795211Table  4 as reported by Jobidon and Charette [26]; results for Lake Anna; treatment = manual removable via pulling of all competing vegetation; principal competitor species were removed (shade intolerant deciduous trees).
10117818−10Figures 3, 5, and  7 as reported by Wood and Mitchell [27]; results for Bragg experiment; mean responses based on bareroot and container stock-types combined results; treatment = glyphosate (Roundup) at 2.5 kg ai/ha (liquid formulation); effectiveness = reductions of 97% in competing vegetation (principally trembling aspen), relative to the untreated control plots, at time of last remeasurement.
10156748240Figure  1 as reported by Robinson et al. [28]; mean response of brush control treatment relative to untreated control plots; treatment = glyphosate (Roundup) at 2.2 kg acid equivalent/ha (liquid formulation) on bladed scarified sites; effectiveness: at the time of the 15 yr post-treatment assessment, the treatment had eliminated the noncrop hardwood species.
1153110−11Tables  2 and 3 as reported by Wood and von Althen [21]; mean responses based on bareroot and container stock-types combined results; treatment = glyphosate (Roundup) at 2 kg ai/ha (liquid formulation); effectiveness = reductions of 5% and 35% in herbaceous and woody vegetation cover, respectively, relative to untreated control plots, at time of last remeasurement.
1111518−7Figures 3, 5, and  7 as reported by Wood and Mitchell [27]; results for Bragg experiment; mean responses based on bareroot and container stock-types and spring and summer seasonal results combined; treatment = glyphosate (Roundup) at 2.5 kg ai/ha (liquid formulation); effectiveness = reductions of 98% in competing vegetation (principally trembling aspen), relative to the untreated control plots, at time of last remeasurement.
12108746246Textual description and Figure  1 as reported in Pitt et al. [29] for Corrigal experimental site; annual directed foliar application of 1.58 or 2% liquid solution of glyphosate (Vision); effectiveness: at the time of the 10 yr remeasurement the average of all treatments had reduced the cover of deciduous woody tree species to less than 10%, tall shrub species to 2%, and low shrub species to 20%.
121138255Figures 3, 5, and  7 as reported by Wood and Mitchell [27]; results for Kenogaming experiment; mean responses based on bareroot and container stock-types and spring and summer seasonal results combined; treatment = glyphosate (Roundup) at 2.14 kg ai/ha (liquid formulation); effectiveness = reductions of 76% in competing vegetation (principally trembling aspen), relative to the untreated control plots, at time of last remeasurement.
12113311−19Figures 3, 5, and  7 as reported by Wood and Mitchell [27]; results for Lampugh experiment; mean responses based on bareroot and container stock-types and spring and summer seasonal results combined; treatment = glyphosate (Roundup) at 2.14 kg ai/ha (liquid formulation); effectiveness = reductions of 94% in competing vegetation (principally trembling aspen), relative to the untreated control plots, at time of last remeasurement.
1310878126Textual description and Figure  1 as reported in Pitt et al. [29] for Hele experimental site; treatment = glyphosate (Vision) at 1.7 kg ai/ha (liquid formulation); effectiveness: at the time of the 10 yr remeasurement the average of all treatments had reduced the cover of deciduous woody tree species to less than 10%, tall shrub species to 2%, and low shrub species to 20%.
14524369−1Table  1 and Figure  2 as reported by Wagner et al. [25]; treatment = glyphosate (Vision) at 4 kg ai/ha (liquid formulation); effectiveness = reduction of 20% in herbaceous vegetation cover, relative to the untreated control plots, at the time of last remeasurement ( ., nil competition from woody species).
20, 155921228−6Table  1 and Figure  2 as reported by Wagner et al. [25]; treatment = glyphosate (Vision) at 4 kg ai/ha (liquid formulation); effectiveness = reduction of 21% in herbaceous vegetation cover, relative to the untreated control plots, at the time of last remeasurement ( ., nil competition from woody species).
23, 4540−11171Table  1 and Figure  2 as reported by Wagner et al. [25]; treatment = glyphosate (Vision) at 4 kg ai/ha (liquid formulation); effectiveness = reduction of 92% in herbaceous vegetation cover, relative to the untreated control plots, at the time of last remeasurement ( ., nil competition from woody species).
30, 1, 258231336−4Table  1 and Figure  2 as reported by Wagner et al. [25]; treatment = glyphosate (Vision) at 4 kg ai/ha (liquid formulation); effectiveness = reduction of 44% in herbaceous vegetation cover, relative to the untreated control plots, at the time of last remeasurement ( ., nil competition from woody species).
32, 3, 4579−2270−8Table  1 and Figure  2 as reported by Wagner et al. [25]; treatment = glyphosate (Vision) at 4 kg ai/ha (liquid formulation); effectiveness = reduction of 93% in herbaceous vegetation cover, relative to the untreated control plots, at the time of last remeasurement ( ., nil competition from woody species).
30, 2, 4512626471Table  1 as reported by Sutherland et al. [22] and Figure  1(d) as presented in Sutherland and Foreman [23]; treatment = hexazinone (Velpar L) at 3.1 kg ai/ha (liquid formulation) in year 0 followed by chemical tending in years 2 and 4 using glyphosate (Vision) at 1.78 kg ai/ha (liquid formulation); effectiveness = reduction of 96% in combined herbaceous and woody vegetation (principally red raspberry and trembling aspen; vegetation measure based on height × cover index), relative to untreated control plots, at time of last remeasurement.
40, 1, 2, 3510922426−8Table  1 and Figure  2 as reported by Wagner et al. [25]; treatment = glyphosate (Vision) at 4 kg ai/ha (liquid formulation); effectiveness = reduction of 57% in herbaceous vegetation cover, relative to the untreated control plots, at the time of last remeasurement ( ., nil competition from woody species).
41, 2, 3, 457915270−5Table  1 and Figure  2 as reported by Wagner et al. [25]; treatment = glyphosate (Vision) at 4 kg ai/ha (liquid formulation); effectiveness = reduction of 94% in herbaceous vegetation cover, relative to the untreated control plots, at the time of last remeasurement ( ., nil competition from woody species).
4−1, 0, 1, 214934312512Figures  13, 14, 15, and 16 as reported by Robinson et al. [28]; results for the scarified but unfertilized plots only; treatment = glyphosate (Vision) at 2 kg ai/ha (liquid formulation); effectiveness = approximate reduction of 100% in herbaceous and woody vegetation cover, relative to the untreated control plots, 3 years post-planting.
50, 1, 2, 3, 452139620Tables  2 and 3 as reported by Wood and von Althen [21]; mean responses based on bareroot and container stock-types results combined; treatment = annual application of glyphosate (Roundup) at 2 kg ai/ha (liquid formulation); effectiveness = reductions of 90% and 100% in herbaceous and woody vegetation cover, respectively, relative to the untreated control plots, at time of last remeasurement.
50, 1, 2, 3, 451082242012Table  1 and Figure  2 as reported by Wagner et al. [25]; treatment = glyphosate (Vision) at 4 kg ai/ha (liquid formulation); effectiveness = reduction of 96% in herbaceous vegetation cover, relative to the untreated control plots, at the time of last remeasurement ( ., nil competition from woody species).
52, 3, 4, 5, 6108746246Textual description and Figure  1 as reported in Pitt et al. [29] for Corrigal experimental site; annual directed foliar application of 1.58 or 2% liquid solution of glyphosate (Vision); effectiveness: at the time of the 10 yr remeasurement the average of all treatments had reduced the cover of deciduous woody tree species to less than 10%, tall shrub species to 8%, and low shrub species to 20%.
5 3, 4, 5, 6, 710878126Textual description and Figure  1 as reported in Pitt et al. [29] for Hele experimental site; annual directed foliar application of 1.58 or 2% liquid solution of glyphosate (Vision); effectiveness: at the time of the 10 yr remeasurement the average of all treatments had reduced the cover of deciduous woody tree species to less than 10%, tall shrub species to 2%, and low shrub species to 20%.
6 −1, 0, 1, 2, 3, 452219522Tables  2 and 3 as reported by Wood and von Althen [21]; mean responses based on bareroot and container stock-types results combined; treatment = annual application glyphosate (Roundup) at 2 kg ai/ha (liquid formulation) including pre-planting treatment; effectiveness = reductions of 90% and 100% in herbaceous and woody vegetation cover, respectively, relative to the untreated control plots, at time of last remeasurement.

Note, all selected studies were located within the Great Lakes - St. Lawrence or Boreal Forest Regions [30].
Number of sequential treatments ( ); Initial year of treatment application relative to the year of seedling establishment (−1 = year before planting (e.g., chemical site preparation); 0 = year of seedling establishment; 1, 2, …, 7 years after seedling establishment, resp.; )); and Length of the observation period relative to the year of seedling establishment ( ).
where is the relative response (%) of the th yield variate ( = basal stem diameter; = total stem height; = total stem volume; and = survival), is the mean value of the th yield variate within the treated population, and is the mean value of the th yield variate within the untreated control population.

We are committed to sharing findings related to COVID-19 as quickly and safely as possible. Any author submitting a COVID-19 paper should notify us at help@hindawi.com to ensure their research is fast-tracked and made available on a preprint server as soon as possible. We will be providing unlimited waivers of publication charges for accepted articles related to COVID-19. Sign up here as a reviewer to help fast-track new submissions.