Share This Article:

Resin Production in Natural and Artificial Red-Cockaded Woodpecker Cavity Trees

Abstract Full-Text HTML XML Download Download as PDF (Size:305KB) PP. 364-374
DOI: 10.4236/ojf.2015.54031    3,396 Downloads   3,771 Views  

ABSTRACT

Resin flow was measured in red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis Vieillot) clusters in longleaf pine (Pinus palustris Mill.) in the southern region of the Angelina National Forest, Texas. Resin flow (ml) at 1.4 m height over 24 hrs was measured from one 2.5 cm punch through the phloem between 0700 and 1000 hrs from March 1999 to September 2000, for a total of 9 measurements per tree. Resin was sampled in naturally active cavity trees, artificial (insert) active, natural inactive, artificial inactive and control pines (84 sample trees). Resin flow pattern was significantly different during the year, but not significantly different in the cavity tree type resin flow. Cavity trees in the 90th percentile (>33.0 ml resin in 24 hrs) were defined as super resin producing. High average resin flows in August 1999 and September 2000 indicate when to sample resin for potential cavity trees. Regression equations were produced to estimate future resin production.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Cite this paper

Kulhavy, D. , Rozelle, K. , Ross, W. , Unger, D. and Conner, R. (2015) Resin Production in Natural and Artificial Red-Cockaded Woodpecker Cavity Trees. Open Journal of Forestry, 5, 364-374. doi: 10.4236/ojf.2015.54031.

References

[1] Bowman, R., & Huh, C. (1995). Tree Characteristics, Resin Flow, and Heartwood Rot in Pines (Pinus palustris, Pinus elliottii), with Respect to Red-Cockaded Woodpecker Cavity Excavation, in Two Hydrologically-Distinct Florida Flatwood Communities. In D. L. Kulhavy, R. G. Hooper, & R. Costa (Eds.), Red-cockaded Woodpecker: Recovery, Ecology and Management (pp. 415-426). Nacogdoches, Texas: Center for Applied Studies in Forestry, College of Forestry, Stephen F. Austin State University.
[2] Conner, R. N., & O’Halloran, K. A. (1987). Cavity Tree Selection by Red-Cockaded Woodpeckers as Related to Growth Dynamics of Southern Pines. Wilson Bulletin, 99, 398-412.
[3] Conner, R. N., & Rudolph, D. C. (1991). Forest Habitat Loss, Fragmentation, and Red-Cockaded Woodpecker Populations. Wilson Bulletin, 103, 446-457.
[4] Conner, R. N., & Rudolph, D. C. (1995). Excavation Dynamics and Use Patterns of Red-Cockaded Woodpecker Cavities: Relationships with Cooperative Breeding. In D. L. Kulhavy, R. G. Hooper, & R. Costa (Eds.), Red-cockaded Woodpecker: Recovery, Ecology and Management (pp. 342-352). Nacogdoches, Texas: Center for Applied Studies in Forestry, College of Forestry, Stephen F. Austin State University.
[5] Conner, R. N., Rudolph, D. C., Kulhavy, D. L., & Snow, A. E. (1991). Causes of Mortality of Red-Cockaded Woodpecker Cavity Trees. Journal of Wildlife Management, 55, 531-537.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3808986
[6] Conner, R. N., Saenz, D., Rudolph, D. C., & Coulson, R. N. (1998). Southern Pine Beetle-Induced Mortality of Pines with Natural and Artificial Red-Cockaded Woodpecker Cavity Trees. Wilson Bulletin, 11, 100-109.
[7] Conner, R. N., Saenz, D., Rudolph, D. C., Ross, W. G., Kulhavy, D. L., & Coulson, R. N. (2001). Does Red-Cockaded Woodpecker Excavation of Resin Wells Increase Risk of Bark Beetle Infestation of Cavity Trees? The Auk, 118, 219-224.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/4089771
[8] Cook, S. P., & Hain, F. P. (1986). Defensive Mechanisms of Loblolly and Shortleaf Pine against Attack by Southern Pine Beetle, Dendroctonus frontalis Zimmermann, and Its Fungal Associate, Ceratocystis minor (Hedgecock) Hunt. Journal of Chemical Ecology, 12, 1397-1406.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/bf01012359
[9] Copeyon, C. K. (1990). A Technique for Constructing Cavities for the Red-Cockaded Woodpecker. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 18, 303-311.
[10] Copeyon, C. K., Walters, J. R., & Carter III, J. H. (1991). Induction of Red-cockaded Woodpecker Group Formation by Artificial Cavity Construction. Journal of Wildlife Management, 55, 549-556.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3809497
[11] Coulson, R. N., Fitzgerald, J. W., Oliveria, F. L., Conner, R. N., & Rudolph, D. C. (1995). Red-Cockaded Woodpecker Habitat Management and Southern Pine Beetle Infestations. In D. L. Kulhavy, R. G. Hooper, & R. Costa (Eds.), Red-Cockaded Woodpecker: Recovery, Ecology and Management (pp. 191-195). Nacogdoches, TX: Center for Applied Studies in Forestry, College of Forestry, Stephen F. Austin State University.
[12] Dennis, J. W. (1971). Utilization of Pine Resin by the Red-Cockaded Woodpecker and Its Effectiveness in Protecting Roosting and Nest Sites. In R. L. Thompson (Ed.), The Ecology and Management of the Red-Cockaded Woodpecker (pp. 78-86). Tallahassee, FL: Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, U. S. Department of the Interior, and Tall Timbers Research Station.
[13] Dowdy, S. M., & Wearden, S. (1991). Statistics for Research (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley-Interscience.
[14] Hain, F. P., Duehl, A. J., Gardner, M. J., & Payne, T. L. (2011). Natural History of the Southern Pine Beetle. In R. N. Coulson, & K. D. Klepzig (Eds.), Southern Pine Beetle II (pp. 13-24). General Technical Report SRS-140, Ashville, NC: U. S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Southern Research Station.
[15] Hodges, J. D., Elam, W. W., Watson, W. F., & Nebeker, T. E. (1979). Oleoresin Characteristics and Susceptibility of Four Southern Pine Beetle (Coleoptera: Scolytidae) Attacks. The Canadian Entomologist, 111, 889-896.
http://dx.doi.org/10.4039/Ent111889-8
[16] Hooper, R. G., Robinson Jr., A. F., & Jackson, J. (1980). The Red-Cockaded Woodpecker: Notes on Life History and Management. General Report SA-GR 9, Atlanta, GA: U. S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 8 p.
[17] Hooper, R. G., Watson, J. C., & Escano, R. E. F. (1990). Hurricane Hugo’s Initial Effects on Red-Cockaded Woodpeckers in the Francis Marion National Forest. Transactions of the North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference, 55, 220-224.
[18] Jackson, J. A. (1971). The Evolution, Taxonomy, Distribution, Past Populations, and Current Status of the Red-Cockaded Woodpecker. In R. L. Thompson (Ed.), The Ecology and Management of the Red-Cockaded Woodpecker (pp. 4-29). Tallahassee, FL: Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, U. S. Department of the Interior, and Tall Timbers Research Station.
[19] Jackson, J. A. (1974). Gray Rat Snakes versus Red-Cockaded Woodpeckers: Predator-Prey Adaptations. The Auk, 91, 342-347.
[20] Jackson, J. A. (1978). Analysis of the Distribution and Population Status of the Red-Cockaded Woodpecker. In R. R. Odum, & L. Landers (Eds.), Proceedings of the Rare and Endangered Wildlife Symposium (pp. 101-111). Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Game and Fish Division Technical Bulletin W44.
[21] James, F. C. (1995). The Status of the Red-Cockaded Woodpecker in 1990 and the Prospect for Recovery. In D. L. Kulhavy, R. G. Hooper, & R. Costa (Eds.), Red-Cockaded Woodpecker: Recovery, Ecology and Management (pp. 436-438). Nacogdoches, TX: Center for Applied Studies in Forestry, College of Forestry, Stephen F. Austin State University.
[22] Lennartz, M. R., Hooper, R. G., & Harlow, R. F. (1987). Sociality and Cooperative Breeding of Red-Cockaded Woodpeckers (Picoides borealis). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 20, 77-88.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00572629
[23] Lennartz, M. R., Geisler, P. H., Harlow, R. F., Long, R. C., Chitwood, K. M., & Jackson, J. A. (1983). Status of the Red-Cockaded Woodpecker on Federal Lands in the South. In D. A. Wood (Ed.), Proceedings of the Red-Cockaded Woodpecker Symposium II (pp. 7-12). Tallahassee, FL: State of Florida Game and Freshwater Fish Commission.
[24] Ligon, J. D. (1970). Behavior and Breeding Biology of the Red-Cockaded Woodpecker. The Auk, 87, 255-278.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/4083919
[25] Lorio Jr., P. L. (1985). Growth-Differentiation Balance: A Basis for Understanding Southern Pine Beetle-Tree Interactions. Forest Ecology and Management, 14, 259-273.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0378-1127(86)90172-6
[26] Lorio Jr., P. L., & Sommers, R. A. (1986). Evidence of Competition for Photosynthates between Growth Processes and Oleoresin Synthesis in Pinus taeda L. Tree Physiology, 2, 301-306.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/treephys/2.1-2-3.301
[27] Lorio, P. L., & Hodges, J. D. (1977). Tree Water Status Affects Induced Southern Pine Beetle Attack and Brood Production. U. S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station, Research Paper SO-135, 7 p.
[28] Lorio Jr., P. L., Sommers, R. A., Blanche, C. A., Hodges, J. D., & Nebeker, T. E. (1990). Modeling Pine Resistance to Bark Beetles Based on Growth and Differentiation Balance Principles. In R. K. Dixon, R. S. Meldaho, G. A. Ruark, & W. G. Warren (Eds.), Process Modeling of Forest Growth Responses to Environmental Stress (pp. 402-409). Portland, OR: Timber Press.
[29] Mitchell, J. H., Kulhavy, D. L., Conner, R. N., & Bryant, C. M. (1991). Susceptibility of Red-Cockaded Woodpecker Colony Areas to Southern Pine Beetle Infestations in East Texas. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry, 15, 158-162.
[30] Paine, T. D., Stephen, F. M., & Cates, R. G. (1985). Induced Defenses against Dendroctonus frontalis and Associated Fungi: Variation in Loblolly Pine Resistance. In S. J. Branham, & R. C. Thatcher (Eds.), Proceedings of the Integrated Pest Management Research Symposium: The Proceedings (pp. 167-169). U. S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, General Technical Report SO-56.
[31] Ross, W. G., Kulhavy, D. L., & Conner, R. N. (1993). Evaluating Susceptibility of Red-Cockaded Woodpecker Cavity Trees to Southern Pine Beetle in Texas. In C. Brissette (Ed.), Proceedings of the Seventh Biennial Southern Silvicultural Work Conference, Mobile, Alabama (pp. 547-553). New Orleans, LA: Southern Forest Experiment Station, General Technical Report SO-93, U. S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service.
[32] Ross, W. D., Kulhavy, D. L., & Conner, R. N. (1995). Vulnerability and Resistance of Red-Cockaded Woodpecker Cavity Trees to Southern Pine Beetle in Texas. In D. L. Kulhavy, R. G. Hooper, & R. Costa (Eds.), Red-Cockaded Woodpecker: Recovery, Ecology and Management (pp. 401-414). Nacogdoches, TX: Center for Applied Studies in Forestry, College of Forestry, Stephen F. Austin State University.
[33] Ross, W. G., Kulhavy, D. L., & Conner, R. N. (1997). Stand Conditions and Tree Characteristics Affect Quality of Longleaf Pine for Red-Cockaded Woodpecker Cavity Trees. Forest Ecology and Management, 1, 145-154.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(96)03894-7
[34] Rudolph, D. C., Kyle, H., & Conner, R. N. (1990). Red-Cockaded Woodpeckers versus Rat Snakes: The Effectiveness of the Resin Barrier. Wilson Bulletin, 102, 14-22.
[35] Taylor, W. E., & Hooper, R. G. (1991). A Modification of Copeyon’s Drilling Technique for Making Artificial Red-Cockaded Woodpecker Cavities. General Technical Report SE-72, Asheville, NC: Southeastern Forest Experiment Station, U. S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service.
[36] Strom, B. A., Goyer, R. A., Ingram, L. L., Boyd, G. D. L., & Lott, L. H. (2002). Oleoresin Characteristics of Progeny of Loblolly Pines That Escaped Attack by the Southern Pine Beetle. Forest Ecology and Management, 158, 169-178.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(00)00710-6
[37] U. S. Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service (1985). Red-Cockaded Woodpecker Recovery Plan. Atlanta, GA: U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 88 p.
[38] U. S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resource Conservation Service (2010). Soil Survey of San Augustine and Sabine Counties, Texas. U. S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, 654 p.
[39] Walters, J. R. (1990). Red-Cockaded Woodpecker, Picoides borealis borealis. Occasional Paper, North Carolina Biological Survey, 20-23.
[40] Walters, J. R., Doerr, P. D., & Carter III, J. H. (1988). The Cooperative Breeding System of the Red-Cockaded Woodpecker. Ethology, 78, 275-305.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0310.1988.tb00239.x
[41] Watson, J. C., Carlson, D. L., Taylor, W. E., & Milling, T. E. (1995). Restoration of the Red-Cockaded Woodpecker Population on the Francis Marion National Forest: Three Years Post Hugo. In D. L. Kulhavy, R. G. Hooper, & R. Costa (Eds.), Red-Cockaded Woodpecker: Recovery, Ecology and Management (pp. 172-182). Nacogdoches, TX: Center for Applied Studies in Forestry, College of Forestry, Stephen F. Austin State University.
[42] Yandell, B. S. (1997). Practical Data Analysis for Designed Experiments. Madras: Chapman and Hall, 312 p.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-3035-4

  
comments powered by Disqus

Copyright © 2019 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.