Associations
provided by BioImages, the virtual fieldguide, UK
Foodplant / parasite
subcortical pycnium of Cronartium ribicola parasitises stem of Pinus lambertiana
Remarks: season: 3-6
Comments
provided by eFloras
The largest species of the genus, Pinus lambertiana also has the longest seed cone in the genus. It is an important timber tree with harvest far exceeding regrowth. It is easily distinguished from P . monticola and P . strobus by its larger cones and thicker cone scales with larger seeds; it is somewhat less reliably distinguished by its leaves, which are slightly wider and more tapering-tipped and have some stomatal lines evident on the abaxial surfaces (the lines not evident in P . monticola and P . strobus ). A "sugary" resin high in cyclitols exudes from the sweet-scented fresh-cut wood.
- license
- cc-by-nc-sa-3.0
- copyright
- Missouri Botanical Garden, 4344 Shaw Boulevard, St. Louis, MO, 63110 USA
Description
provided by eFloras
Trees to 75m; trunk to 3.3m diam., massive, straight; crown narrowly conic, becoming rounded. Bark cinnamon- to gray-brown, deeply furrowed, plates long, scaly. Branches spreading, distal branches ascending; twigs gray-green to red-tan, aging gray, mostly puberulent. Buds cylindro-ovoid, red-brown, to 0.8cm, resinous. Leaves 5 per fascicle, spreading to ascending, persisting 2--4 years, 5--10cm ´ (0.9--)1--1.5(--2)mm, straight, slightly twisted, pliant, blue-green, abaxial surface with only a few lines evident, adaxial surfaces with evident white stomatal lines, margins finely serrulate, apex acuminate; sheath (1--)1.5--2cm, shed early. Pollen cones ellipsoid-cylindric, to 15mm, yellow. Seed cones maturing in 2 years, shedding seeds and falling soon thereafter, often clustered, pendent, symmetric, cylindric before opening, lance-cylindric to ellipsoid-cylindric when open, 25--50cm, yellow-brown, stalks 6--15cm; apophyses somewhat thickened; umbo terminal, depressed, resinous, slightly excurved. Seeds obovoid, oblique apically; body 1--2cm, deep brown; wing broad, 2--3cm. 2 n =24.
- license
- cc-by-nc-sa-3.0
- copyright
- Missouri Botanical Garden, 4344 Shaw Boulevard, St. Louis, MO, 63110 USA
Habitat & Distribution
provided by eFloras
Montane dry to moist forests; 330--3200m; Calif., Nev., Oreg.; Mexico in n Baja California.
- license
- cc-by-nc-sa-3.0
- copyright
- Missouri Botanical Garden, 4344 Shaw Boulevard, St. Louis, MO, 63110 USA
Broad-scale Impacts of Fire
provided by Fire Effects Information System Plants
More info for the terms:
basal area,
duff,
fire severity,
fire suppression,
forest,
fuel,
fuel moisture,
litter,
prescribed fire,
severity,
tree,
wildfireThe Research Project Summary
Plant response to prescribed burning with varying season,
weather, and fuel moisture in mixed-conifer forests of California provides information
on prescribed fire and postfire response
of many plant community species including sugar pine.
Near the Plumas National Forest, prescribed fire in a mixed-conifer-California
black oak forest with a sugar pine component successfully reduced fuel load.
When a wildfire burned through the site previously burned under prescription,
fire severity and fire suppression costs were less compared to adjacent land
where fire had been excluded [
27]. For further information on this study, see the
Research Paper by Moghaddas [
27].
A fall prescribed fire in the Tharp Creek Watershed of Sequoia National Park
produced 17.2% and 11.7% average annual sugar pine mortality on 2 white fir-mixed
conifer sites monitored for 5 years after fire. Mortality was concentrated in the
subcanopy. The fire burned from 23 to 26 October 1990. Relative humidity during
the day was 21% to 30% and at night was 30% to 40%. Fuel moisture levels in the
litter and duff averaged 28%. For 100-hour and 1,000-hour fuels, moisture levels
were 14% and 64%, respectively. At the time of ignition, air temperatures were
50 to 61 °F (10-16 °C) and winds were calm. The fire was a combination of
backing and strip
headfires with flame lengths of 0.16 to 7.9 feet (0.05-2.4 m).
One-hour, 10-hour, and 100-hour fuels were reduced by 96%, 77%, and 60%, respectively.
Tree (≥4.6 feet (1.4 m)) mortality was evaluated before and after fire as
well as from an unburned reference site. Basal area (m²/ha) changes were also
monitored before and after the fire. Mean annual percent change in sugar pine basal
area increased by an average of 0.17% and 1.39% on the 2 burned sites before the fire
compared to the control site. From 1989 to 1994 (includes 1 year of prefire data),
sugar pine basal area was reduced 4.28% to 15.67% on the burned sites compared to
the control [
28]. For more information, see the entire
Research Paper by Mutch and
Parsons [
28].
- bibliographic citation
- Habeck, R. J. 1992. Pinus lambertiana. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/
Common Names
provided by Fire Effects Information System Plants
sugar pine
- bibliographic citation
- Habeck, R. J. 1992. Pinus lambertiana. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/
Cover Value
provided by Fire Effects Information System Plants
More info for the term:
coverSugar pine is used for cover by wildlife. Early in sugar pine
development, large mammals use dense stands as hiding and thermal cover.
Mature trees are used by arboreal species such as birds, squirrels, and
other small mammals. Old-growth sugar pine is prime habitat for cavity
nesters such as woodpeckers and owls [
16].
- bibliographic citation
- Habeck, R. J. 1992. Pinus lambertiana. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/
Description
provided by Fire Effects Information System Plants
Sugar pines may live 400 to 500 years and are second only to giant
sequoia (Sequoia gigantea) in total volume. A record sugar pine in
California measured 216 feet (66 m) tall and 122 inches (310 cm) in
d.b.h. Trees up to 250 feet (76 m) tall and 10 feet (3 m) in diameter
have been reported. Mature sugar pine cones are among the largest of
all conifers, averaging 12 inches (30 cm) in length, and can reach 22
inches (56 cm) long. Its needles are 3 inches (7.5 cm) long and have
five to a cluster. Sugar pines pyramidal crown has whorls of horizontal
branches with several conspicuously longer than others. Its sap
contains a sugary substance [
7,
16,
21].
- bibliographic citation
- Habeck, R. J. 1992. Pinus lambertiana. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/
Distribution
provided by Fire Effects Information System Plants
Sugar pine extends from the western slope of the Cascade Range in
north-central Oregon to the Sierra San Pedro Mártir in Baja California.
Its distribution is almost continuous through the Klamath and Siskiyou
mountains and on western slopes of the Cascade Range and Sierra Nevada.
Smaller and more disjunct populations are found in the Coast Range of
southern Oregon and California, Transverse and Peninsula ranges of
southern California, and east of the Cascade and Sierra Nevada crests.
Its southern extremity is an isolated population high on a plateau in
the Sierra San Pedro Mártir in Baja California, Mexico. Over 80 percent
of its distribution is in California [
16,
21].
- bibliographic citation
- Habeck, R. J. 1992. Pinus lambertiana. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/
Fire Ecology
provided by Fire Effects Information System Plants
More info for the term:
fire regimeSugar pine is very resistant to low- to moderate-severity fires. It has
adapted a thick, fire-resistant bark and open canopy that retards aerial
fire spread. Young sugar pine seedlings prefer bare mineral seedbeds
[
2,
3].
FIRE REGIMES : Find fire regime information for the plant communities in which this
species may occur by entering the species name in the
FEIS home page under
"Find FIRE REGIMES".
- bibliographic citation
- Habeck, R. J. 1992. Pinus lambertiana. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/
Fire Management Considerations
provided by Fire Effects Information System Plants
Prescribed burning has been found to be an effective management
treatment that will destroy infected stands of sugar pine where dwarf
mistletoe and other diseases have rendered stands unmerchantable [
1].
Dead sugar pine is susceptible to blue stain fungus in the sapwood;
however, the heartwood is very durable. Salvagable trees may be found
up to 17 years after being killed by fire [
15].
- bibliographic citation
- Habeck, R. J. 1992. Pinus lambertiana. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/
Growth Form (according to Raunkiær Life-form classification)
provided by Fire Effects Information System Plants
More info on this topic. More info for the term:
phanerophytePhanerophyte
- bibliographic citation
- Habeck, R. J. 1992. Pinus lambertiana. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/
Habitat characteristics
provided by Fire Effects Information System Plants
More info for the term:
mesicSugar pine is found on a variety of sites from moist, steep, north- and
east-facing slopes, to more mesic, south-facing slopes. The fuels under
sugar pine are generally heavy with deep soils.
Climate: Temperature and precipitation vary widely throughout the range
of sugar pine. The general weather pattern consists of hot, dry
summers and cool, wet winters. Precipitation during July and August is
usually less than 1 inch (2.5 cm) per month and summertime relative
humidities are low. Most precipitation occurs between November and
April, mostly in the form of snow at middle elevations. Total
precipitation varies from 33 to 69 inches (83-173 cm) per year [
16].
Soils and topography: Soil parent material include rocks of volcanic,
granitic, and sedimentary origin. Soils formed from peridotite or
serpentinite typically support sugar pine stands of inferior growth and
quality. The most extensive soils supporting sugar pine are
well-drained, moderately to rapidly permeable, and slightly acidic to
neutral pH (7.0). Best development of sugar pine is on mesic soils with
sandy to clayey loam textures. Much of the terrain occupied by sugar
pine is steep and rugged. Sugar pines are equally distributed on all
aspects at lower elevations but grow best on warm exposures as elevation
increases. Optimum growth occurs on gentle terrain at middle elevations
[
16].
Elevation: Sugar pine ranges from near sea level in the Coast Range to
more than 10,000 feet (3,000 m) in the Transverse Range. Elevational
limits increase with decreasing latitude. Typical elevational ranges
are as follows [
16]:
Cascade Range: 1,100 to 5,400 feet (335-1,645 m)
Sierra Nevada: 2,000 to 7,500 feet (610-2,285 m)
Sierra San Pedro Mártir: 7,056 to 9,100 feet (2,150-2,775 m)
Transverse and Peninsular Ranges: 4,000 to 10,000 feet (1,220-3,000 m)
- bibliographic citation
- Habeck, R. J. 1992. Pinus lambertiana. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/
Habitat: Cover Types
provided by Fire Effects Information System Plants
More info on this topic. This species is known to occur in association with the following cover types (as classified by the Society of American Foresters):
207 Red fir
211 White fir
229 Pacific Douglas-fir
231 Port-Orford-cedar
232 Redwood
234 Douglas-fir - tanoak - Pacific madrone
244 Pacific ponderosa pine - Douglas-fir
246 California black oak
247 Jeffrey pine
249 Canyon live oak
- bibliographic citation
- Habeck, R. J. 1992. Pinus lambertiana. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/
Habitat: Ecosystem
provided by Fire Effects Information System Plants
More info on this topic. This species is known to occur in the following ecosystem types (as named by the U.S. Forest Service in their Forest and Range Ecosystem [FRES] Type classification):
FRES20 Douglas-fir
FRES21 Ponderosa pine
FRES26 Lodgepole pine
FRES27 Redwood
FRES28 Western hardwoods
FRES34 Chaparral - mountain shrub
- bibliographic citation
- Habeck, R. J. 1992. Pinus lambertiana. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/
Habitat: Plant Associations
provided by Fire Effects Information System Plants
More info on this topic. This species is known to occur in association with the following plant community types (as classified by Küchler 1964):
More info for the terms:
forest,
shrub K002 Cedar - hemlock - Douglas-fir forest
K005 Mixed conifer forest
K006 Redwood forest
K007 Red fir forest
K008 Lodgepole pine - subalpine forest
K010 Ponderosa shrub forest
K034 Montane chaparral
- bibliographic citation
- Habeck, R. J. 1992. Pinus lambertiana. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/
Immediate Effect of Fire
provided by Fire Effects Information System Plants
Sugar pine is rated as intermediate in fire tolerance. Young sugar
pines are susceptible to low- to high-severity fires. Mature trees can
survive most fires, suffering only bole scorch. Sugar pine
susceptibility to secondary attack by insects and disease following fire
is rated as low [
3].
- bibliographic citation
- Habeck, R. J. 1992. Pinus lambertiana. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/
Importance to Livestock and Wildlife
provided by Fire Effects Information System Plants
Birds and mammals use sugar pine as a source of food and shelter.
Douglas' squirrels and white-headed woodpeckers have been noted to
occupy sugar pine trees [
16].
- bibliographic citation
- Habeck, R. J. 1992. Pinus lambertiana. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/
Key Plant Community Associations
provided by Fire Effects Information System Plants
More info for the terms:
codominant,
forest,
mesic,
woodlandSugar pine usually occurs in mixed-conifer forest stands with a wide
variety of overstory associates including ponderosa and Jeffrey pine
(Pinus ponderosa and P. jeffreyi), California red fir (Abies magnifica),
white fir (A. concolor), noble fir (A. procera), and Douglas-fir
(Pseudotsuga menziesii) [
4,
21]. In southern California, sugar pine is
characteristically found in vegetation types of the woodland and
timberland chaparral zones. Canyon live oak (Quercus chrysolepis) is
found with sugar pine on more mesic sites, while at higher elevations
sugar pine occurs with mountain whitethorn (Ceanothus cordulatus), Parry
manzanita (Arctostaphylos parryana var. pinctorum), and bush chinquapin
(Chrysolepsis sempervirens) [
14].
Publications listing sugar pine as a codominant species in plant
vegetation types (vts) or community types (cts) are listed as follows:
Area Classification Authority
---- -------------- ---------
s CA forest (vts) Horton 1960
s CA forest (cts) Thorne 1977
CA forest (cts) Thorne 1976
- bibliographic citation
- Habeck, R. J. 1992. Pinus lambertiana. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/
Life Form
provided by Fire Effects Information System Plants
More info for the term:
treeTree
- bibliographic citation
- Habeck, R. J. 1992. Pinus lambertiana. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/
Management considerations
provided by Fire Effects Information System Plants
More info for the term:
coneSugar pine is planted on a vast scale in Oregon and California, and also
has been tried in several countries around the world. Large-scale
plantings, however, are few due to establishment difficulties and
restrictive site requirements for good growth [
21]. Sugar pine does not
self-prune; therefore, high-quality clear-lumber requires the pruning of
lower limbs. It is the most tolerant to oxidant air pollution among its
coniferous associates [
8,
16].
Disease: Sugar pine is highly susceptible to white pine blister rust
caused by the fungus Cronartium ribicola. Among commercially important
North American white pines, sugar pine is the most susceptible to this
disease. Infected seedlings and young trees are inevitably killed by
cankers girdling the main stem. Incidence and intensity of infection on
sugar pine are highest in Oregon and northern California and become
progressively less to the south, as the climate becomes warmer and
drier. Dwarf mistletoe (Arceuthobium californicum) may seriously damage
infected trees, but spread is slow and can be controlled by sanitation
cutting [
13,
16,
21].
Insects: The most damaging insect threatening sugar pine is the
mountain pine beetle (Dendroctonus ponderosae). During periods of
drought, other insects such as the red turpentine beetle (D. valens) and
California flathead borer (Melanophila californica) usually attack
unhealthy trees and those under moisture stress. The sugar pine cone
beetle (Conophthorus lambertianae) is extremely destructive to
developing second-year cones [
5,
16].
Animals: Small mammals such as pocket mice, jumping mice, chipmunks,
and ground squirrels forage on young seedlings, thus reducing
regeneration on disturbed sites [
3].
- bibliographic citation
- Habeck, R. J. 1992. Pinus lambertiana. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/
Occurrence in North America
provided by Fire Effects Information System Plants
CA NV OR MEXICO
- bibliographic citation
- Habeck, R. J. 1992. Pinus lambertiana. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/
Other uses and values
provided by Fire Effects Information System Plants
Native Americans used the pitch from sugar pine to repair canoes and to
fasten arrowheads and feathers to shafts [
2].
- bibliographic citation
- Habeck, R. J. 1992. Pinus lambertiana. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/
Palatability
provided by Fire Effects Information System Plants
Sugar pine is considered low in palatability to livestock and wildlife.
- bibliographic citation
- Habeck, R. J. 1992. Pinus lambertiana. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/
Phenology
provided by Fire Effects Information System Plants
More info on this topic. Seasonal growth durations of sugar pine at various elevations in the Sierra
Nevada are as follows [
11]:
Height Radial
Growth* Growth
------ ------
Start (days)** 146 107
Start (date) May 26 April 17
Length (days) 51 129
Rapidity (days) 15 46
* An 8-year average.
** Number of days from January 1.
- bibliographic citation
- Habeck, R. J. 1992. Pinus lambertiana. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/
Post-fire Regeneration
provided by Fire Effects Information System Plants
More info for the term:
seed off-site colonizer; seed carried by wind; postfire years 1 and 2
off-site colonizer; seed carried by animals or water; postfire yr 1&2
- bibliographic citation
- Habeck, R. J. 1992. Pinus lambertiana. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/
Regeneration Processes
provided by Fire Effects Information System Plants
More info for the terms:
basal area,
cone,
epigeal,
fresh,
litter,
monoecious,
seed,
stratificationSugar pine does not sprout, but young trees can be rooted from cuttings.
Its primary regeneration strategy is via seed [
3,
16].
Flowering and fruiting: Sugar pine is monoecious. Reproductive buds
are set in July and August, but are not discernible until late the next
spring. Time of pollination ranges from late May to early August,
depending on elevation. Female strobili are approximately 1 to 2 inches
(2.5-5.0 cm) long when pollinated and may double in size by the end of
the growing season. Fertilization occurs the following spring,
approximately 12 months after pollination. Dates of cone opening range
from mid-August at low elevations to early October at high elevations.
Sugar pine does not become a good cone producer until it has attained a
diameter of about 30 inches (75 cm) or is about 150 years old [
2,
16].
Seed production and dissemination: Mature trees produce large amounts
of seeds, averaging up to 150 seeds per cone. In good crop years, the
proportion of sound seeds is usually high (67 to 99 percent) but in
light crop years can fall as low as 28 percent. Seed shed may begin in
late August at low elevations and at higher elevations is usually
complete by the end of October. Seeds are large and heavy, averaging
2,100 seeds per pound (4,630/kg). Seeds are not dispersed great
distances by wind, and 80 percent fall within 100 feet (30 m) of the
source. Birds and small mammals aid in seed dissemination [
16].
Seedling development: Sugar pine seeds may lie dormant, but dormancy
can be broken by a 60 to 90 day stratification. Fresh seed may
germinate with a 90 percent success rate if adequately ripened, cleaned,
and stratified. Losses due to unprepared seedbeds, drought, insects,
and rodents may be high. Germination is epigeal. Seedlings rapidly
grow a deep taproot when seeds germinate on mineral soil. Seedlings
will germinate on both litter and bare mineral soil, but development is
slow under shade conditions. After 2 years, taproots range from 22 to
40 inches (56-102 cm) deep. Planting sugar pine has met with some
failure. A low drought tolerance may be the determining factor. Sowing
stratified seed in February or March extends the growing season and
produces healthy seedlings of plantable size in one season [
4,
16].
Growth and yield: Early growth of sugar pine is slow compared to
ponderosa pine but increases rapidly in the pole stage and continues
through maturity. On favorable sites, growth increments in basal area
of 2.5 percent or more can be sustained for up to 100 to 150 years. The
best growth can be found between 4,500 to 6,000 feet (1,370-1,830 m) in
the central Sierra Nevada, between the American and San Joaquin Rivers.
Sugar pine is semitolerant to shade and may exhibit poor growth if
seedlings are enclosed by brush. Sugar pine is a deep-rooted species
that is not susceptible to windthrow [
9,
16,
21].
- bibliographic citation
- Habeck, R. J. 1992. Pinus lambertiana. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/
Regional Distribution in the Western United States
provided by Fire Effects Information System Plants
More info on this topic. This species can be found in the following regions of the western United States (according to the Bureau of Land Management classification of Physiographic Regions of the western United States):
1 Northern Pacific Border
3 Southern Pacific Border
4 Sierra Mountains
- bibliographic citation
- Habeck, R. J. 1992. Pinus lambertiana. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/
Successional Status
provided by Fire Effects Information System Plants
More info on this topic. More info for the terms:
climax,
forest,
naturalSugar pine is primarily an early-seral to seral species. It is
rarely found in pure stands. When sugar pine is found to be the dominant
species in old-growth stands, it most often was dominant to begin with
or released by natural causes. White fir would usually be the climax
species in mixed conifer forest in the absence of any natural
disturbances. When disturbance does occur, it creates gaps in which
sugar pine is well adapted to grow [
3,
4,
16,
25].
- bibliographic citation
- Habeck, R. J. 1992. Pinus lambertiana. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/
Taxonomy
provided by Fire Effects Information System Plants
The currently accepted scientific name of sugar pine is Pinus
lambertiana Dougl. [
24]. There are no recognized subspecies, varieties,
or forms.
- bibliographic citation
- Habeck, R. J. 1992. Pinus lambertiana. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/
Wood Products Value
provided by Fire Effects Information System Plants
High-grade sugar pine lumber is sought after for its dimensional
stability and workability. The wood is light and resists deformity. It
is easily milled and is favored for molding, window and door frames,
window sashes, doors, and other special products like piano keys and
organ pipes [
16].
- bibliographic citation
- Habeck, R. J. 1992. Pinus lambertiana. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/
Associated Forest Cover
provided by Silvics of North America
Sugar pine is a major timber species at middle elevations in the Klamath
and Siskiyou Mountains, Cascade, Sierra Nevada, Transverse, and Peninsula
Ranges. Rarely forming pure stands, it grows singly or in small groups of
trees. It is the main component in the forest cover type Sierra Nevada
Mixed Conifer (Society of American Foresters Type 243) (10) generally
comprising 5 to 25 percent of the stocking. It is a minor component in 10
other types:
207 Red Fir
211 White Fir
229 Pacific Douglas-Fir
231 Port-Orford-Cedar
232 Redwood
234 Douglas-Fir-Tanoak-Pacific Madrone
244 Pacific Ponderosa Pine-Douglas-Fir
246 California Black Oak
247 Jeffrey Pine
249 Canyon Live Oak
In the northern part of its range, sugar pine is commonly associated
with Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), ponderosa pine (Pinus
ponderosa), grand fir (Abies grandis), incense-cedar (Calocedrus
decurrens), western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla), western
redcedar (Thuja plicata), Port-Orford-cedar (Chamaecyparis
lawsoniana), tanoak (Lithocarpus densiflorus), and Pacific
madrone (Arbutus menziesii). In the central part it is associated
with ponderosa pine, Jeffrey pine (Pin us jeffreyi), white fir
(Abies concolor), incense-cedar, California red fir (A.
magnifica), giant sequoia (Sequoiadendron giganteum), and
California black oak (Quercus kelloggii). Farther south, the usual
associates are Jeffrey pine, ponderosa pine, Coulter pine (Pinus
coulteri), incense-cedar, white fir, and bigcone Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga
macrocarpa). At upper elevations Jeffrey pine, western white pine (Pinus
monticola), California red fir, and lodgepole pine (P. contorta)
grow with sugar pine. In the Sierra San Pedro Martir, Jeffrey pine and
white fir are the main associates.
Common brush species beneath sugar pine include greenleaf manzanita (Arctostaphylos
patula), deerbrush (Ceanothus integerrimus), snowbrush (C.
velutinus), mountain whitethorn (C. cordulatus), squawcarpet
(C. prostratus), bearclover (Chamaebatia foliolosa), bush
chinkapin (Castanopsis sempervirens), bitter cherry (Prunus
emarginata), salal (Gaultheria shallon), coast rhododendron
(Rhododendron californicum), and gooseberries and currants in the
genus Ribes (11). From a silvicultural standpoint, Ribes spp.
are especially important because they are alternate hosts to the white
pine blister rust fungus (Cronartium ribicola). At least 19
different species grow in the Mixed Conifer Type, of which the Sierra
gooseberry (Ribes roezlii) is most prevalent on more xeric, upland
sites, and the Sierra currant (R. nevadense) on more mesic sites
(35).
- license
- cc-by-nc
- copyright
- USDA, Forest Service
Climate
provided by Silvics of North America
Temperature and precipitation vary widely throughout the range of sugar
pine. For equivalent latitudes, temperature decreases and precipitation
increases with elevation, and for equivalent elevations, temperature
increases and precipitation decreases from north to south. Patterns
unifying this variability are relatively warm, dry summers and cool, wet
winters. Precipitation during July and August is usually less than 25 mm
(1 in) per month, and summertime relative humidities are low. Although
water stored in snowpacks and soils delays the onset and shortens the
duration of summer drought, evaporative stress often becomes great enough
to arrest growth in the middle of the season (15). Most precipitation
occurs between November and April, as much as two-thirds of it in the form
of snow at middle and upper elevations (26). Within its natural range,
precipitation varies from about 840 to 1750 mm (33 to 69 in). Because
winter temperatures are relatively mild and seldom below freezing during
the day, considerable photosynthesis and assimilation are possible during
the dormant season, at least partially offsetting the effects of summer
drought (15).
- license
- cc-by-nc
- copyright
- USDA, Forest Service
Damaging Agents
provided by Silvics of North America
The pathology of sugar pine is dominated by
white pine blister rust, caused by Cronartium ribicola, a disease serious
enough to severely limit natural regeneration in areas of high hazard, and
thereby alter successional trends. Among commercially important North
American white pines, sugar pine is the most susceptible. Infected
seedlings and young trees are inevitably killed by cankers girdling the
main stem.
Blister rust was introduced into western North America shortly after the
turn of the century at a single point on Vancouver Island and has since
spread eastward throughout the Inland Empire and south through the
Cascade, Klamath, North Coast, and Sierra Nevada Ranges. It has not yet
been found in the Transverse or Peninsular Ranges of southern California,
even though alternate host species are abundant there. Within the range of
sugar pine, conditions for infection are not nearly so uniform as for
western white pine in the Inland Empire. Incidence and intensity of
infection on sugar pine are highest in Oregon and northern California and
become progressively less to the south, as climate becomes warmer and
drier. Within any area, however, hazard varies widely and depends on local
site conditions. These are complex, but two of the most important factors
are the duration of moisture retention on foliage following rain, fog, or
dew, and the distribution and density of the alternate hosts, currant and
gooseberry bushes (Ribes spp.). Thus, cool north slopes
are more hazardous than warm south slopes, and relatively humid stream
bottoms and lakesides are more hazardous than upland sites. In the Cascade
Range and Sierra Nevada of northern California, infection averaged two to
three times higher near stream bottoms than on adjacent slopes (4).
Attempts to control blister rust by chemical therapy or eradicating
alternate hosts have been abandoned as impractical and ineffective. Except
on highly hazardous sites, sugar pine in natural stands can be effectively
managed by judiciously selecting leave trees with cankers relatively far
from the bole and by pruning cankers in the lower crown (4).
Plantations are a much more serious problem. The microenvironmental
changes on a site following clearcutting-including dew formation on
foliage and the rapid regeneration of alternate host Ribes spp.
greatly augment the probability of rust intensification and spread on
both hosts. Uniform age and stocking make sugar pine plantations
vulnerable to nearly total destruction for 20 years or longer. Genetically
resistant sugar pines in mixture with other conifers offer the most
promising solution.
Dwarf mistletoe (Arceuthobium californicum) may seriously damage
infected trees by reducing growth in height, diameter, and crown size, and
predisposing weakened trees to attack by bark beetles. Extending
throughout the range of sugar pine, except for isolated stands in Nevada,
the south Coast Ranges of California, and Baja California, this mistletoe
was found in only 22 percent of the stands examined and on only 10 percent
of the trees in those stands. Spread is slow and can be controlled by
sanitation cutting (20,42).
A needle cast caused by Lophodermella arcuata is occasionally
and locally damaging. Root diseases caused by Armillaria mellea,
Heterobasidion annosum, and Verticicladiella wageneri are
capable of killing trees of all ages and sizes but, though widespread, are
usually at endemic levels. Several trunk and butt rots attack sugar pine
but are usually confined to mature and overmature trees (2,21).
Several root and damping-off pathogens cause severe damage to sugar pine
in nurseries, with annual losses up to 50 percent (45). In approximate
order of importance, these are Fusarium oxysporum, Macrophomina
phaseoli, and species of Pythium, Phytophthora, and Rhizoctonia.
In addition to causing direct losses in the nursery, these diseases
may reduce field survival of planted seedlings in more stressful
environments by causing stunting and chlorosis. Nursery fumigation
controls most of the organisms involved but is least effective on Fusarium.
A simple and promising alternative control method is early sowing of
stratified seed. Soil temperatures in late winter and early spring permit
seed germination and root development but are still cool enough to inhibit
fungal growth.
Sugar pine hosts many different insects, but the mountain pine beetle
(Dendroctonus ponderosae) is of overwhelming importance. This
insect can cause widespread mortality, often killing large groups of trees
(48). Several other bark-feeding insects contribute directly or indirectly
to mortality in sugar pines, particularly after periods of drought. Death
results from predisposing trees to mountain pine beetle. The red
turpentine beetle (Dendroctonus valens) is usually restricted to
small areas near the root crown but during drought may extend two or more
meters up the bole, destroying the entire cambium. The California
flatheaded borer (Melanophila californica) usually attacks
decadent and unhealthy trees, but trees under heavy moisture stress are
also vulnerable. The California fivespined ips (Ips paraconfusus)
is only capable of penetrating thin bark in sugar pine. Small trees are
often killed, but large trees only top-killed (16).
The sugar pine cone beetle (Conophthorus lambertianae) can be
extremely destructive to developing second-year cones, destroying up to 75
percent of the crop in some years. Since stunted cones are apparent by
mid-June, the extent of the crop loss can be assessed well before cone
collection. The sugar pine scale (Matsucoccus paucicicatrices) occasionally
kills foliage and branches, predisposing trees to bark beetle attack. The
dead "flags" resulting from heavy attack mimic advanced symptoms
of white pine blister rust. Occasionally, the black pineleaf scale (Nuculaspis
californica) defoliates sugar pine at midcrown, weakening the tree.
These scale attacks are often associated with industrial air pollution or
heavy dust deposits on foliage (16).
Among its coniferous associates, sugar pine is the most tolerant to
oxidant air pollution (34), while intermediate in fire tolerance (39) and
frost tolerance (43,44). It is less tolerant of drought than most
companion species with which it has been critically compared, including
knobcone (Pinus attenuata) and Coulter pines (50,51), ponderosa
pine, Douglas-fir, incense-cedar, and grand fir (40).
- license
- cc-by-nc
- copyright
- USDA, Forest Service
Flowering and Fruiting
provided by Silvics of North America
Sugar pine is monoecious. Reproductive
buds are set in July and August but are not discernible until late in the
next spring. Time of pollination ranges from late May to early August,
depending on elevation, and to a lesser extent on latitude.
Female strobili are 2.5 to 5.0 cm (1 to 2 in) long at time of
pollination and double in size by the end of the growing season.
Fertilization of eggs by male gametes takes place late the following
spring, about 12 months after pollination. By this time, the seed is at
its final size with a fully developed coat. Conelet elongation continues
during the second season until maturation in late summer. Mature sugar
pine cones are among the largest of all conifers, averaging 30 cm (12 in)
and ranging up to 56 cm (22 in) long. Dates of cone opening range from
mid-August at low elevations to early October at high elevations
(12,19,32).
Cone production starts later and is less prolific in sugar pine than in
its associates. During a 16-year study in the central Sierra, fewer than 5
percent of sugar pines less than 20 cm (8 in) in d.b.h., and 50 percent
less than 31 cm (12 in) in d.b.h., produced cones. Of trees 51 cm (20 in)
or more, 80 percent produced cones, and dominant trees produced 98 percent
of the total. Intervals between heavy cone crops averaged 4 years and
ranged from 2 to 7 (12).
Loss of sugar pine cones is heavy; the probability of a pollinated
conelet developing to maturity is only 40 to 50 percent. Predation by the
sugar pine cone beetle (Conophthorus lambertianae) can cause up to
93 percent loss. Douglas squirrels and white-headed woodpeckers also take
a heavy toll (7,11,17).
Spontaneous abortion of first-year conelets is high. Observations of
control-pollinated trees in the Klamath Mountains showed that 19 percent
of female strobili were lost 5 to 12 weeks after bagging, with no obvious
signs of insect or pathogen-caused damage (41). The amount of abortion
varied from 15 to 85 percent among trees, for both bagged and unbagged
strobili. Since this pattern was consistent in successive years, a genetic
cause was suggested.
- license
- cc-by-nc
- copyright
- USDA, Forest Service
Genetics
provided by Silvics of North America
Sugar pine is one of the more genetically variable members of the genus.
Average heterozygosity of specific genes coding for seed proteins
(isozymes) was 26 percent, a value near the upper range (0 to 36 percent)
of pines studied so far (6). How adaptive variation is distributed over
the range of environments encountered in over 14° of latitude and
2000 m (6,560 ft) of elevation is largely unknown, however, because of a
lack of field data from provenance or progeny tests.
In a 3-year nursery trial, pronounced differences in height and diameter
growth were found among seedlings of five seed sources sampled along an
elevational transect on the west slope of the Sierra Nevada (18). The
fastest growing seedlings were from the lower-middle elevation (1100 m or
3,595 ft) and were twice the height of those from the highest elevation
(2195 m or 7,200 ft). Except for the source from the lowest elevation (770
m or 2,525 ft), which ranked second, growth varied inversely with
elevation. Elevation of the seed source accounted for 52 percent of the
total variance among seedlings, and the component of variance for families
within stands was a substantial 16 percent. More comprehensive nursery
trials, of families from seed parents ranging from southern California to
southern Oregon, showed similar trends (27). Greatest growth was expressed
in seedlings from intermediate elevations in the central Sierra Nevada, a
result consistent with observations in natural stands. Thus, genetic
adaptation to climatic variables associated with elevation is clearly
evident in sugar pine, requiring a close match between seed source and
planting site in artificial regeneration. The degree of variability
expressed among progenies of different seed parents within seed collection
zones indicates that selection for rapid early growth should be effective.
Resistance to white pine blister rust is strongly inherited, and three
different kinds have been recognized (29). A rapid, hypersensitive
reaction to invading mycelium is conditioned by a dominant gene. This
gene, which occurs at variable but relatively low frequencies throughout
the range of sugar pine, is highly effective against most sources of
inoculum. A race of blister rust capable of overcoming this gene was
discovered in a plantation in the Klamath Mountains (30), but evidently
had not spread from this site 10 years after it was found (31). In certain
families, another kind of resistance is expressed by slower rates of
infection and mortality, fewer infections per tree, and by a higher rate
of abortion of incipient infections. This "slow rusting" is
apparently inherited quantitatively and, while less dramatic than single
gene resistance, may be more stable to variation in the pathogen in the
long term. Probably two or more generations of selection and breeding will
be necessary to accumulate enough genes in parental stock to make this
kind of resistance usable in commercial silviculture. A third kind of
resistance is age-dependent. In common garden tests, infection among
grafted clones from mature trees ranged from 0 to 100 percent, yet
offspring from the apparently resistant clones were fully susceptible.
Although not understood, the mechanisms and inheritance of mature tree
resistance are very strong and could play a significant role in
stabilizing resistance over a rotation. Since all three kinds of
resistance are inherited independently, there is a real promise for an
enduring and well-buffered genetic control of this most destructive
disease.
- license
- cc-by-nc
- copyright
- USDA, Forest Service
Growth and Yield
provided by Silvics of North America
Veteran sugar pines often reach great size.
Large trees have commonly scaled 114 to 142 m³ (20,000 to 25,000 fbm,
Scribner log rule), with a record of 232 m³ (40,710 fbm). A "champion,"
located on the North Fork of the Stanislaus River in California, measured
65.8 m (216 ft) tall and 310 cm (122 in) in d.b.h., but trees up to 76 m
(250 ft) tall have been reported (11,36). These and previous champions of
this century are dwarfed by the first sugar pine measured by David Douglas
and described in his diary (37): "Three feet from the ground, 57 feet
9 inches in circumference; 134 feet from the ground, 17 feet 5 inches;
extreme length 215 feet."
Early growth of sugar pine is slow compared with ponderosa pine, but
growth rates accelerate in the pole stage and are sustained for longer
periods than those of common associates. Consequently, sugar pines are
usually the largest trees, except for giant sequoia, in mature and
old-growth stands. On better sites annual growth increments in basal area
of 2.5 percent and more can be sustained up to stem diameters of 76 to 127
cm (30 to 50 in) or for 100 to 150 years (11). Growth of sugar pine is
best between 1370 and 1830 m (4,500 and 6,000 ft) in the central Sierra
Nevada, between the American and San Joaquin Rivers.
In young mixed conifer stands, sugar pine often constitutes a relatively
small proportion of the total basal area but contributes
disproportionately to growth increment. On the El Dorado National Forest
in the western Sierra Nevada, in stands ranging in age from 50 to 247
years, the sugar pine component was only 6 to 7 percent (range: 3 to 14
percent) of the average basal area, but its average annual basal area
growth was 11.3 percent (range: 2 to 35 percent) of the stand total. A
similar relationship was found on the Plumas National Forest in the
northern Sierra Nevada: in stands from 58 to 95 years old, average basal
area of sugar pine was 7 percent (3 to 16), but 10-year growth was more
than 12 percent (6 to 19). Ten-year volume increment in mixed conifer
stands from 40 to 80 years old was greater for sugar pine than for
Douglas-fir, white fir, ponderosa pine, and incense-cedar in each of five
basal area categories (9). Mean increment for sugar pine was 4.1 percent,
compared to 3.1 percent for all others.
Yields of sugar pine are difficult to predict, because it grows in mixes
of varying proportion with other species. In the old-growth forest, the
board foot volume of sugar pine was 40 percent of total in stands
dominated by ponderosa pine and sugar pine. In exceptional cases on very
small areas, yields were 2688 m³/ha (192,000 fbm/acre) (11). Yield
tables for young growth are based on averages for all commercial conifers
and assume full stocking (8). The data base is limited, so the tables are
at best a rough guide. Realistically, yields may reach 644 m³/ha
(46,000 fbm/acre) in 120 years on medium sites, and Up to 1190 m³/ha
(85,000 fbm/acre) in 100 years on the best sites, with intensive
management (11).
- license
- cc-by-nc
- copyright
- USDA, Forest Service
Reaction to Competition
provided by Silvics of North America
Sugar pine tolerates shade better than
ponderosa pine but is slightly less tolerant than incense-cedar and
Douglas-fir and much less so than white fir (14). A seral species, it
becomes less tolerant with age, and overtopped trees decline unless
released (11). Thus, dominant sugar pines in old-growth stands were
probably dominant from the start, or released by natural causes early in
life. White fir would usually be the climax species in mixed conifer
forests in the absence of any natural disturbance; however, fire, insects,
disease, and other agents are natural and pervasive features of these
forests. Such disturbances frequently cause gaps, in which the relatively
tolerant sugar pine is adapted to grow (14). For these reasons, sugar pine
is often adapted to regenerate in a shelterwood silvicultural system (33).
Competition from brush severely retards seedling establishment and
growth. Only 18 percent of seedlings starting under brush survived over a
period of 18 to 24 years, and after 10 years the tallest seedlings
measured were only 29 cm (11.4 in). Given an even start with brush,
however, seedlings can compete successfully (11).
Light shelterwoods can protect seedlings of sugar pine and white fir
against frost, which seldom affects ponderosa and Jeffrey pines, and
provide them with a competitive advantage because of their greater
tolerance to shade (13,43,44). On the other hand, young sugar pines
stagnate beneath an overstory and in competition with root systems of
established trees or brush. But because they respond well to release, the
basal area increment of sugar pines is often double that of companion
species after heavy thinnings (33). Thus, skill in the amount and timing
of overstory removal is a key factor in successful silvicultural
management of sugar pine.
Sugar pine does not self-prune early, even in dense stands, and
mechanical pruning is necessary to ensure clear lumber of high quality.
- license
- cc-by-nc
- copyright
- USDA, Forest Service
Rooting Habit
provided by Silvics of North America
Sugar pine develops a deep taproot at an early
age.
- license
- cc-by-nc
- copyright
- USDA, Forest Service
Seed Production and Dissemination
provided by Silvics of North America
Mature trees produce large
amounts of sound seeds. In a study of 210 trees in 13 stands in the
central and northern Sierra Nevada, the average number of sound seeds per
cone was 150, with individual trees ranging from 34 to 257. Higher numbers
of seeds per cone (209 to 219) have been reported, but whether the count
was based on sound or total seeds was not specified. In good crop years,
the proportion of sound seeds is usually high (67 to 99 percent) but in
light crop years can fall as low as 28 percent (7,12).
Cones are ripe and start to open when their color turns light brown and
specific gravity (fresh weight basis) drops to about 0.62. Seed shed may
begin in late August at low elevations and at higher elevations is usually
complete by the end of October (11).
Seeds are large and heavy, averaging 4,630 seeds per kilogram
(2,100/lb). Since their wings are relatively small for their size, seeds
are not often dispersed great distances by wind, and 80 percent fall
within 30 m (100 ft) of the parent tree. Birds and small mammals may be an
important secondary mechanism of dispersal, even though they consume most
of the seeds they cache. In good seed years, large amounts of seed fall,
with estimates ranging from 86,500 to more than 444,800/ha (35,000 to
180,000/acre) in central Sierra Nevada stands (11,32).
- license
- cc-by-nc
- copyright
- USDA, Forest Service
Seedling Development
provided by Silvics of North America
Sugar pine seeds show dormancy, which can
be readily broken by stratification for 60 to 90 days or by removal of the
seed coat and inner papery membrane surrounding the seed. Germination of
fresh seed is uniformly rapid and high, exceeding 90 percent if adequately
ripened, cleaned, and stratified. Viability may decline rapidly with time
in storage at temperatures above freezing, but deep-frozen seed maintains
viability much longer (1,32,47).
On unprepared seed beds, seed-to-seedling ratios are high (244 to 483).
Soil scarification reduced the ratio to 70 in one case, and scarification
with rodent poisoning dropped it to 38 in another (12).
Seedling losses are continual and only 20 to 25 percent of the initial
germinants may survive as long as 10 years. Drought may kill up to half of
the first-year seedlings. Cutworms and rodents, which eat seeds still
attached to seedling cotyledons, also take their toll (11,12). Seedlings
infected by blister rust rarely survive more than a few years.
Germination is epigeal (32). Seedlings rapidly grow a deep taproot when
seeds germinate on bare mineral soil. In one comparison, taproots
penetrated to an average depth of 43 cm (17 in) on a bare sandy soil, but
only half as deep when the soil was overlain with duff (11). Lateral roots
develop near and parallel to the soil surface, often growing downward some
distance from the stem. In heavier, more shallow soils, laterals are often
larger than taproots. During the second season, laterals commonly
originate on the lower taproot and occupy a cone of soil which has its
base at the tip of the taproot. After 2 years on three different soil
types in Oregon, the taproots of natural sugar pine seedlings ranged from
56 to 102 cm (22 to 40 in), were significantly deeper than those of
Douglas-fir and grand fir, but shorter than those of ponderosa pine and
incense-cedar. Lengths of main lateral roots showed the same species
differences. Top-to-root ratios for sugar pine ranged from 0.17 to 0.28
(length) and from 1.33 to 1.60 (dry weight) (46).
Seasonal shoot growth starts later and terminates earlier in sugar pine
than in its usual conifer associates, except white fir. At middle
elevations in the central Sierra Nevada, shoot elongation begins in late
May, about 2 weeks after ponderosa pine and a month before white fir, and
lasts about 7 weeks. Radial growth begins about 6 weeks earlier than shoot
growth and extends throughout the summer (11).
Planting of sugar pine has not been so easy or successful as for some of
the yellow pines. Although reasons for the many recorded failures are
often complex, lower drought tolerance may be one of the factors. During
natural regeneration, the ability of sugar pine seedlings to avoid summer
drought by rapidly growing a deep taproot largely compensates for the
relative intolerance of tissues to moisture stress (38).
To survive the first summer after planting, seedlings must have the
capacity to regenerate vigorous new root systems. For other western
conifers, root growth capacity is conditioned by particular combinations
of nursery environment and time in cold storage after lifting; these
requirements are species and seed-source specific (22,24,38). Although
patterns of root growth capacity have not been worked out for sugar pine,
it is clear that amounts of root growth are substantially less for sugar
pine than for its associates (23).
Early top growth of sugar pine is not so rapid as that of western yellow
pines, and 1-year stock is too small for planting when seed is sown in
May, for years the tradition in California nurseries. Root diseases, to
which young sugar pines are unusually vulnerable, can compound the problem
by weakening seedlings that survive, thus reducing their chances of
establishment on the site. Sowing stratified seed in February or March
extended the growing season and produced healthy seedlings of plantable
size in one season (23). A more expensive alternative to bareroot stock
that holds some promise is containerized seedlings grown under accelerated
growth regimes (28).
- license
- cc-by-nc
- copyright
- USDA, Forest Service
Soils and Topography
provided by Silvics of North America
Sugar pine grows naturally over a wide range of soil conditions
typically associated with conifer-hardwood forests. Soil parent materials
include rocks of volcanic, granitic, and sedimentary origin and their
metamorphic equivalents and are usually not of critical importance. Soils
formed on ultrabasic intrusive igneous rocks such as peridotite and
serpentinite, however, have low calcium-to-magnesium ratios and usually
support open conifer stands of inferior growth and quality. Nevertheless,
sugar pine is often the dominant conifer on the more mesic of these sites
(39,40).
Because site productivity is a function of several environmental
variables-edaphic, climatic, and biotic-it is difficult to relate parent
material groups or particular soil series with specific productivity
classes, especially when they span wide ranges of elevation and latitude.
Other factors being equal, the main edaphic influences on conifer growth
are soil depth and texture, permeability, chemical characteristics, and
drainage and runoff properties (5).
The most extensive soils supporting sugar pine are well drained,
moderately to rapidly permeable, and acid in reaction. Soils derived from
ultrabasic rocks are very slightly acid to neutral (pH 7.0). In general,
acidity increases with soil depth. Several edaphic properties are
influenced by the degree of soil profile development. Soil porosity,
permeability, and infiltration rate decrease with more developed profiles,
while water-holding capacity, rate of run-off, and vulnerability to
compaction increase.
Sugar pine reaches its best development and highest density on mesic
soils of medium textures (sandy loam to clay loams) but ranges into the
lower reaches of frigid soils when other climatic variables are suitable.
These soils are found most commonly in the order Ultisols and Alfisols.
The best stands in the Sierra Nevada grow on deep, sandy loam soils
developed from granitic rock. In the southern Cascade Range the best
stands are on deep clay loams developed on basalt and rhyolite. In the
Coast Range and Siskiyou Mountains in California and Oregon, the best
stands are on soils derived from sandstone and shale.
Much of the terrain occupied by sugar pine is steep and rugged. Sugar
pines are equally distributed on all aspects at lower elevations but grow
best on warm exposures (southern and western) as elevation increases.
Optimal growth occurs on gentle terrain at middle elevations.
- license
- cc-by-nc
- copyright
- USDA, Forest Service
Special Uses
provided by Silvics of North America
Upper grades of old-growth sugar pine command premium prices for
specialty uses where high dimensional stability, workability, and affinity
for glue are essential. The wood is light (specific gravity, 0.34 ±
0.03) (3), resists shrinkage, warp, and twist, and is preferred for finely
carved pattern stock for machinery and foundry casting. Uniformly soft,
thin-celled spring and summer wood and straight grain account for the ease
with which it cuts parallel to or across the grain, and for its
satin-textured, lustrous finish when milled. Its easy working qualities
favor it for molding, window and door frames, window sashes, doors, and
other special products such as piano keys and organ pipes. Wood properties
of young growth are not so well known. Pruning would undoubtedly be
required to produce clear lumber during short rotations.
- license
- cc-by-nc
- copyright
- USDA, Forest Service
Vegetative Reproduction
provided by Silvics of North America
Sugar pine does not sprout, but young
trees can be rooted from cuttings. The degree of success is apparently
under strong genetic control. In one trial the proportion of cuttings that
rooted from different ortets from 3 to 6 years old ranged from 0 to 100
percent (27). As for most conifers, rootability diminishes rapidly with
age of donor tree. Grafts, however, can be made from donors of all ages,
with success rates from 70 to 80 percent common. Problems of
incompatibility, frequent in some species such as Douglas-fir, are rare in
sugar pine.
- license
- cc-by-nc
- copyright
- USDA, Forest Service
Distribution
provided by Silvics of North America
Sugar pine extends from the west slope of the Cascade Range in north
central Oregon to the Sierra San Pedro Martir in Baja California
(approximate latitude 30° 30' to 45° 10' N.). Its distribution
is almost continuous through the Klamath and Siskiyou Mountains and on
west slopes of the Cascade Range and Sierra Nevada, but smaller and more
disjunct populations are found in the Coast Ranges of southern Oregon and
California, Transverse and Peninsula Ranges of southern California, and
east of the Cascade and Sierra Nevada crests. Its southern extremity is an
isolated population high on a plateau in the Sierra San Pedro Martir in
Baja California. Over 80 percent of the growing stock is in California
(49) where the most extensive and dense populations are found in mixed
conifer forests on the west slope of the Sierra Nevada.
In elevation, sugar pine ranges from near sea level in the Coast Ranges
to more than 3000 m (10,000 ft) in the Transverse Range. Elevational
limits increase with decreasing latitude, with typical ranges as follows:
Cascade Range
335 to 1645 m (1,100 to 5,400 ft)
Sierra Nevada
610 to 2285 m (2,000 to 7,500 ft)
Transverse and Peninsula Ranges
1220 to 3000 m (4,000 to 10,000 ft)
Sierra San Pedro Martir
2150 to 2775 m (7,065 to 9,100 ft)
- The native range of sugar pine.
- license
- cc-by-nc
- copyright
- USDA, Forest Service
Brief Summary
provided by Silvics of North America
Pinaceae -- Pine family
Bohun B. Kinloch, Jr. and William H. Scheuner
Called "the most princely of the genus" by its discoverer,
David Douglas, sugar pine (Pinus lambertiana) is the tallest and
largest of all pines, commonly reaching heights of 53 to 61 m (175 to 200
ft) and d.b.h. of 91 to 152 cm (36 to 60 in). Old trees occasionally
exceed 500 years and, among associated species, are second only to giant
sequoia in volume. For products requiring large, clear pieces or high
dimensional stability, sugar pine's soft, even-grained, satin-textured
wood is unsurpassed in quality and value. The huge, asymmetrical branches
high in the crowns of veteran trees, bent at their tips with long,
pendulous cones, easily identify sugar pine, which "more than any
other tree gives beauty and distinction to the Sierran forest" (25).
- license
- cc-by-nc
- copyright
- USDA, Forest Service
Physical Description
provided by USDA PLANTS text
Tree, Evergreen, Monoecious, Habit erect, Trees without or rarely having knees, Tree with bark rough or scaly, Young shoots 3-dimensional, Buds resinous, Leaves needle-like, Leaves alternate, Needle-like leaf margins finely serrulate (use magnification or slide your finger along the leaf), Leaf apex acute, Leaves < 5 cm long, Leaves > 5 cm long, Leaves < 10 cm long, Leaves blue-green, Leaves white-striped, Needle-like leaves triangular, Needle-like leaves not twisted, Needle-like leaf habit erect, Needle-like leaves per fascicle mostly 5, Needle-like leaf sheath early deciduous, Twigs pubescent, Twigs viscid, Twigs not viscid, Twigs without peg-like projections or large fascicles after needles fall, Berry-like cones orange, Woody seed cones > 5 cm long, Seed cones bearing a scarlike umbo, Umbo with missing or very weak prickle, Umbo with obvious prickle, Bracts of seed cone included, Seeds brown, Seeds winged, Seeds unequally winged, Seed wings prominent, Seed wings equal to or broader than body.
- compiler
- Stephen C. Meyers
- compiler
- Aaron Liston
- compiler
- Steffi Ickert-Bond
- compiler
- Damon Little
Pinus lambertiana
provided by wikipedia EN
Pinus lambertiana (commonly known as the sugar pine or sugar cone pine) is the tallest and most massive pine tree, and has the longest cones of any conifer. The species name lambertiana was given by the Scottish botanist David Douglas, who named the tree in honour of the English botanist, Aylmer Bourke Lambert. It is native to coastal and inland mountain areas along the Pacific coast of North America, as far north as Oregon and as far south as Baja California in Mexico.
Description
Growth
The sugar pine is the tallest and largest Pinus species, commonly growing to 40–60 meters (130–195 ft) tall, exceptionally to 82 m (269 ft) tall, with a trunk diameter of 1.2–2.5 m (3 ft 11 in – 8 ft 2 in), exceptionally 3.5 m (11 ft 6 in).[2] The tallest recorded specimen is 83.45 m (273 ft 9 in) tall, is located in Yosemite National Park, and was discovered in 2015.[3] The second tallest recorded was "Yosemite Giant", an 82.05 m (269 ft 2 in) tall specimen in Yosemite National Park, which died from a bark beetle attack in 2007. The tallest known living specimens today grow in southern Oregon and Yosemite National Park: one in Umpqua National Forest is 77.7 m (254 ft 11 in) tall and another in Siskiyou National Forest is 77.2 m (253 ft 3 in) tall. Yosemite National Park also has the third tallest, measured to 80.5 m (264 ft 1 in) tall as of June 2013; the Rim Fire affected this specimen, but it survived.
The bark of Pinus lambertiana ranges from brown to purple in color and is 5–10 centimeters (2–4 in) thick.[2] The upper branches can reach out over 8 m (26 ft).[2] Like all members of the white pine group (Pinus subgenus Strobus), the leaves ("needles") grow in fascicles ("bundles") of five,[2] with a deciduous sheath. They are 5–11 cm (2–4+1⁄4 in) long.[4] Sugar pine is notable for having the longest cones of any conifer, mostly 10–50 cm (4–19+3⁄4 in) long,[2][5] exceptionally to 60 cm (23+1⁄2 in) long (although the cones of the Coulter pine are more massive); their unripe weight of 1–2 kilograms (2.2–4.4 lb) makes them perilous projectiles when chewed off by squirrels.[2] The seeds are 1–2 cm (1⁄2–3⁄4 in) long, with a 2–3-centimeter (3⁄4–1+1⁄4-inch) long wing[5] that aids their dispersal by wind. Sugar pine never grows in pure stands, always in a mixed forest and is shade tolerant in youth.[6]
Distribution
The sugar pine occurs in the mountains of Oregon and California in the Western United States, and Baja California in northwestern Mexico; specifically the Cascade Range, Sierra Nevada, Coast Ranges, and Sierra San Pedro Martir. It is generally more abundant towards the south and can be found growing in elevations between 500 and 1,500 m (1,600 and 4,900 ft) above sea level.[2]
Genome
The massive 31 gigabase mega-genome of sugar pine has been sequenced in 2016 by the large PineRefSeq consortium.[7] This makes the genome one of the largest sequenced and assembled so far.[7]
The transposable elements that make up the megagenome are linked to the evolutionary change of the sugar pine. The sugar pine contains extended regions of non-coding DNA, most of which is derived from transposable elements. The genome of the sugar pine represents one extreme in all plants, with a stable diploid genome that is expanded by the proliferation of transposable elements, in contrast to the frequent polyploidization events in angiosperms.[8]
Embryonal growth
In late stage of embryonal development, the sugar pine embryo changes from a smooth and narrow paraboloid to a less symmetric structure. This configuration is caused by a transverse orientation of division planes in the upper portion of the embryo axis. The root initial zone is established, and the epicotyl develops as an anlage flanked by regions of that define the cotyledonary buttresses. At this stage, the embryo is composed of the suspensor, root initials and root cap region, hypocotyl-shoot axis, and the epicotyl. The upper (distal) portion of the embryo, which gives rise to the cotyledons and the epicotyl, is considered to be the shoot apex.[9]
Shoot apex
The apex has the following four zones:[10]
- The apical initials produce all cells of the shoot apex through cell division. It is located at the top of the meristem and the cells are larger in size compared to other cells on the surface layer.
- The central mother cell generates the rib meristem and the inner layers of the peripheral tissue zone through cell division. It presents a typical gymnosperm appearance and is characterized by cell expansion and unusual mitosis that occurs in the central region. The rate of mitosis increases on its outer edge.
- The peripheral tissue zone consists of two layers of cells that are characterized by dense cytoplasm and mitosis of high frequency.
- Lastly, the rib meristem is a regular arrangement of vertical files of cells which mature into the pith of the axis.
Etymology
Naturalist John Muir considered sugar pine to be the "king of the conifers". The common name comes from the sweet resin, which Native Americans used as a sweetener.[11] John Muir found it preferable to maple sugar.[12] It is also known as the great sugar pine. The scientific name was assigned by David Douglas, who was the first to describe it in 1826,[2] in honor of Aylmer Bourke Lambert.
Ecology
Wildlife
The large size and high nutritional value of the sugar pine seeds are appealing to many species. Yellow pine chipmunks (Neotamias amoenus) and Steller's jays (Cyanocitta stelleri) gather and hoard sugar pine seeds. Chipmunks gather wind-dispersed seeds from the ground and store them in large amounts. Jays collect seeds by pecking the cones with their beaks and catching the seeds as they fall out. Although wind is a main dispersion factor of sugar pine seeds, animals tend to collect and store them before the wind can blow them far.[13]
Black bears (Ursus americanus) rely on sugar pine seeds for their food source in the fall months within the Sierra Nevada. There is relationship between sugar pine seeds and oak acorns, as the bears will feed preferentially on those that are in a higher supply for that season. Both sugar pine and oak species are currently in decline, which can have a direct effect on black bear food sources within the Sierra Nevada.[14]
Threats
Sugar pine trees have been impacted by the invasive species of mountain pine beetles (Dendroctonus ponderosae) that are native to western North America. The beetles lay their eggs inside of the tree and inhibit the trees ability to defend itself against the invading species. The beetles also feed from the trees nutrients which slowly weakens the trees overall health, making the pines more susceptible to other threats like fires and fungal infections by white pine blister rust.[15] Blister rust can weaken the tree and enable further infestation by mountain pine beetles due to the lack of defense from the sugar pine.[16]
Sugar pine starting to succumb to white pine blister rust
The sugar pine has been severely affected by the white pine blister rust (Cronartium ribicola),[17] a fungus that was accidentally introduced from Europe in 1909. A high proportion of sugar pines have been killed by the blister rust, particularly in the northern part of the species' range that has experienced the rust for a longer period of time. The rust has also destroyed much of the Western white pine and whitebark pine throughout their ranges.[18] The U.S. Forest Service has a program (see link below) for developing rust-resistant sugar pine and western white pine. Seedlings of these trees have been introduced into the wild. The Sugar Pine Foundation in the Lake Tahoe Basin has been successful in finding resistant sugar pine seed trees and has demonstrated that it is important for the public to assist the U.S. Forest Service in restoring this species. However, blister rust is much less common in California, and sugar, Western white and whitebark pines still survive in great numbers there.[19]
The species is generally resistant to fire because of its thick bark and because it clears away competing species.[2] However, its mortality has been directly linked to dryer conditions and higher temperatures. Sugar pine trees grow in western North America, a region already impacted by climate change. Higher temperatures within a sugar pine forest can lower resin levels within the tree which will cause less protection against pathogens. At the same time the warmer winters make the survival of the pests and pathogens more likely. The weakened or dying trees then provide fuel to the forest fires, which may become more frequent and more intense, if the climate change results in warmer temperatures in summer, particularly if coupled with drier conditions and stronger winds.[20]
Protective efforts
Sugar pine trees are in a slow decline because of the several threats it faces: white pine blister rust, mountain pine beetles and climate change. Efforts to restore sugar pines and other white pine trees that have been impacted by invasive species, climate change and fires have been undertaken by governmental and non-governmental entities. One of the latter is a non-for-profit organization called Sugar Pine Foundation created in 2004 to plant sugar pine seeds in the Sierra Nevada along the border of California and Nevada.[19] They plant seedlings grown from seeds collected from blister rust resistant trees. In order to identify if the trees resistant to that pathogen, Sugar Pine Foundation tested over 500 sugar pine trees and have found 66 resistant trees.[19] The foundation is building a sugar pine population that is resistant to white pine rust because the fungus is a major threat and will continue to kill sugar pine trees at a very high rate.[21]
Uses
According to David Douglas, who was guided to the (exceptionally thick) tree specimen he was looking for by a Native American,[2] some tribes ate the sweetish seeds. These were eaten raw and roasted, and also used to make flour or pulverized into a spread.[2] Native Americans also ate the inner bark.[2] The sweet sap or pitch was consumed, in small quantities due to its laxative properties,[22] but could also be chewed as gum.[2] Its flavor is thought largely to be derived from the pinitol it contains.[2]
In the mid-19th century, the trees were used liberally as lumber during the California Gold Rush. In modern times they are used in much lower quantities, being spared for high-end products as with Western white pine.[2]
The odorless wood is also preferred for packing fruit, as well as storing drugs and other goods. Its straight grain also makes it a useful organ pipe material.[22]
Folklore
In the Achomawi creation myth, Annikadel, the creator, makes one of the 'First People' by intentionally dropping a sugar pine seed in a place where it can grow. One of the descendants in this ancestry is Sugarpine-Cone man, who has a handsome son named Ahsoballache.[23]
After Ahsoballache marries the daughter of To'kis the Chipmunk-woman, his grandfather insists that the new couple have a child. To this end, the grandfather breaks open a scale from a sugar pine cone, and secretly instructs Ahsoballache to immerse the scale's contents in spring water, then hide them inside a covered basket. Ahsoballache performs the tasks that night; at the next dawn, he and his wife discover the infant Edechewe near their bed.[23]
The Washo language has a word for sugar pine, simt'á:gɨm, and also a word for "sugar pine sugar", nanómba.
References
-
^ Farjon, A. (2013). "Pinus lambertiana". IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. 2013: e.T42374A2976106. doi:10.2305/IUCN.UK.2013-1.RLTS.T42374A2976106.en. Retrieved 13 November 2021.
-
^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o Arno, Stephen F.; Hammerly, Ramona P. (2020) [1977]. Northwest Trees: Identifying & Understanding the Region's Native Trees (field guide ed.). Seattle: Mountaineers Books. pp. 26, 30–35. ISBN 978-1-68051-329-5. OCLC 1141235469.
-
^ "3 Sierra sugar pines added to list of 6 biggest in world". Associated Press. South Lake Tahoe, California. 31 Jan 2021. Retrieved 13 Feb 2023.
-
^ Jepson Flora Project (ed.). "Pinus lambertiana". Jepson eFlora. The Jepson Herbarium, University of California, Berkeley.
-
^ a b Kral, Robert (1993). "Pinus lambertiana". In Flora of North America Editorial Committee (ed.). Flora of North America North of Mexico (FNA). Vol. 2. New York and Oxford – via eFloras.org, Missouri Botanical Garden, St. Louis, MO & Harvard University Herbaria, Cambridge, MA.
-
^ Earle, Christopher J., ed. (2018). "Pinus lambertiana". The Gymnosperm Database.
-
^ a b Stevens, K.A.; et al. (2016). "Sequence of the Sugar Pine Megagenome". Genetics. 204 (4): 1613–1626. doi:10.1534/genetics.116.193227. PMC 5161289. PMID 27794028.
-
^ Gonzalez-Ibeas, Daniel; et al. (2016). "Assessing the Gene Content of the Megagenome: Sugar Pine (Pinus lambertiana)". G3 (Bethesda). 6 (12): 3787–3802. doi:10.1534/g3.116.032805. PMC 5144951. PMID 27799338.
-
^ Berlyn, Graeme P (1967). "The Structure of Germination in Pinus Lambertiana Dougl". Yale School of Forestry & Environmental Studies, Bulletin Series. 77.
-
^ Sacher, J.A. (1954). "Structure and Seasonal Activity of the Shoot Apices of Pinus Lambertiana and Pinus ponderosa". American Journal of Botany. 41 (9): 749–759. doi:10.1002/j.1537-2197.1954.tb14406.x.
-
^ "Sugar pine". Oregonencyclopedia.org. Retrieved 18 June 2017.
-
^ Saunders, Charles Francis (1976). Edible and Useful Wild Plants of the United States and Canada. Courier Dover Publications. p. 219. ISBN 0-486-23310-3.
-
^ Thayer, T; Vander Wall, S (2005). "Interactions between steller's jays and yellow pine chipmunks over scatter-hoarded sugar pine seeds". Journal of Animal Ecology. 74 (2): 365–374. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2656.2005.00932.x. JSTOR 3505625.
-
^ Mazur, R; Klimley, AP; Folger, K (2013). "Implications of the variable availability of seasonal foods on the home ranges of black bears, Ursus americanus, in the Sierra Nevada of California". Animal Biotelemetry. 1 (16): 16. doi:10.1186/2050-3385-1-16.
-
^ "Mountain pine beetle". Ontarios invading species awareness program. 2012. Archived from the original on 2020-09-27.
-
^ Van Mantgem, PJ; Stephenson, NL; Keifer, M; Keeley, J (2004). "Effects of an introduced pathogen and fire exclusion on the demography of sugar pine". Ecological Applications. 14 (5): 1590–1602. doi:10.1890/03-5109. JSTOR 4493673.
-
^ Moore, Gerry; Kershner, Bruce; Craig Tufts; Daniel Mathews; Gil Nelson; Spellenberg, Richard; Thieret, John W.; Terry Purinton; Block, Andrew (2008). National Wildlife Federation Field Guide to Trees of North America. New York: Sterling. p. 79. ISBN 978-1-4027-3875-3.
-
^ Maloney, P; Duriscoe, D; Smith, D; Burton, D; Davis, D; Pickett, J; Cousineau, R; Dunlap, J. "White Pine Blister Rust on High Elevation White Pines in California" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2006-10-09. Retrieved 2007-02-05.
-
^ a b c "Sugar Pine Foundation". Sugarpinefoundation.org. Retrieved 18 June 2017.
-
^ Slack, A; Kane, J; Knapp, E; Sherriff, R (2017). "Contrasting impacts of climate and competition on large sugar pine growth and defense in a fire-excluded forest of the central sierra nevada". Forests. 8 (7): 244. doi:10.3390/f8070244.
-
^ Maloney, PE; Vogler, DR; Eckert, AJ; Jensen, CE; Neale, DB (2011). "Population biology of sugar pine (Pinus lambertiana Dougl.) with reference to historical disturbances in the Lake Tahoe Basin: Implications for restoration". Forest Ecology and Management. 262 (5): 770–779. doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2011.05.011.
-
^ a b Peattie, Donald Culross (1953). A Natural History of Western Trees. New York: Bonanza Books. p. 55.
-
^ a b Woiche, Istet (1992). Merriam, Clinton Hart (ed.). Annikadel: The History of the Universe as Told by the Achumawi Indians of California. Tucson: University of Arizona Press. ISBN 978-0-8165-1283-6. OCLC 631716557.
- license
- cc-by-sa-3.0
- copyright
- Wikipedia authors and editors
Pinus lambertiana: Brief Summary
provided by wikipedia EN
Pinus lambertiana (commonly known as the sugar pine or sugar cone pine) is the tallest and most massive pine tree, and has the longest cones of any conifer. The species name lambertiana was given by the Scottish botanist David Douglas, who named the tree in honour of the English botanist, Aylmer Bourke Lambert. It is native to coastal and inland mountain areas along the Pacific coast of North America, as far north as Oregon and as far south as Baja California in Mexico.
- license
- cc-by-sa-3.0
- copyright
- Wikipedia authors and editors