An air-drying model for piled logs of Eucalyptus globulus and Eucalyptus nitens in Chile

Bown, Horacio E.; Lasserre, Jean-Pierre

doi:10.1186/s40490-015-0047-6

New Zealand Journal of Forestry Science

Table 1 Initial and final condition of air-drying log piles (n = 120) of E. nitens and E. globulus in two lengths (244 cm, 350 cm) with and without bark in Rucamanqui, Los Angeles, Chile

From: An air-drying model for piled logs of Eucalyptus globulus and Eucalyptus nitens in Chile

Season	Species	Treatment	n	Days	Green mass start (kg)	Water loss (kg)	Water loss (kg day⁻¹)	Total MC loss (%, green)	Daily MC loss (% day⁻¹, green)	Total MC loss (%, dry)	Daily MC loss (% day⁻¹, dry)
Winter	E. nitens	244 bark	5	167	1950 ± 71e	529 ± 16d	3.2 ± 0.1d	27.2 ± 0.4bc	0.16 ± 0.003bc	62.9 ± 0.7a	0.38 ± 0.004a
		244 debark	5	167	2172 ± 115de	608 ± 39cd	3.6 ± 0.2cd	27.9 ± 0.6bc	0.17 ± 0.004bc	59.8 ± 1.2a	0.36 ± 0.007a
		350 bark	5	167	2848 ± 103bc	658 ± 20cd	3.9 ± 0.1cd	23.1 ± 0.5d	0.14 ± 0.003d	50.8 ± 1.4b	0.30 ± 0.008b
		350 debark	5	167	2534 ± 171cd	693 ± 49c	4.1 ± 0.3c	27.4 ± 0.6bc	0.16 ± 0.003bc	57.8 ± 1.1ab	0.35 ± 0.006ab
	E. globulus	244 bark	5	167	2387 ± 68cde	641 ± 15cd	3.8 ± 0.1cd	26.9 ± 0.6c	0.16 ± 0.003c	63.0 ± 1.6a	0.38 ± 0.009a
		244 debark	5	167	2751 ± 42c	877 ± 19b	5.3 ± 0.1b	31.9 ± 1.1a	0.19 ± 0.006a	69.0 ± 2.9a	0.41 ± 0.018a
		350 bark	5	167	3225 ± 123ab	899 ± 31b	5.4 ± 0.2b	28.0 ± 1.1bc	0.17 ± 0.006bc	64.5 ± 2.8a	0.39 ± 0.017a
		350 debark	5	167	3435 ± 70a	1051 ± 41a	6.3 ± 0.2a	30.6 ± 0.9ab	0.18 ± 0.005ab	65.6 ± 2.3a	0.39 ± 0.014a
		Mean	40		2663 ± 83	744 ± 28	4.5 ± 0.2	27.9 ± 0.5	0.17 ± 0.003	61.7 ± 1.0	0.37 ± 0.006
Spring	E. nitens	244 bark	5	146	2526 ± 81d	993 ± 30cde	6.8 ± 0.2cde	39.4 ± 0.8ab	0.27 ± 0.005ab	93.7 ± 1.8a	0.64 ± 0.012a
		244 debark	5	146	2942 ± 100cd	958 ± 36de	6.6 ± 0.2de	32.6 ± 0.5cd	0.22 ± 0.004cd	73.1 ± 1.7c	0.50 ± 0.012c
		350 bark	5	146	3796 ± 152a	1178 ± 65bc	8.1 ± 0.4bc	31.1 ± 1.3d	0.21 ± 0.009d	73.0 ± 2.8c	0.50 ± 0.019c
		350 debark	5	146	3761 ± 112a	1506 ± 57a	10.3 ± 0.4a	40.1 ± 1.2a	0.27 ± 0.008a	85.1 ± 2.4ab	0.58 ± 0.016ab
	E. globulus	244 bark	5	146	2487 ± 102d	912 ± 22e	6.2 ± 0.2e	36.8 ± 0.9ab	0.25 ± 0.006ab	86.2 ± 1.7bc	0.59 ± 0.012bc
		244 debark	5	146	2668 ± 92cd	992 ± 25cde	6.8 ± 0.2cde	37.2 ± 0.6ab	0.26 ± 0.004ab	80.5 ± 1.4bc	0.55 ± 0.010bc
		350 bark	5	146	3133 ± 67bc	1119 ± 30cd	7.7 ± 0.2cd	35.7 ± 0.4bc	0.24 ± 0.002bc	84.4 ± 1.7bc	0.58 ± 0.011bc
		350 debark	5	146	3577 ± 192ab	1330 ± 65ab	9.1 ± 0.4ab	37.2 ± 0.5ab	0.25 ± 0.003ab	77.8 ± 2.7c	0.53 ± 0.018c
		Mean	40		3111 ± 90	1124 ± 34	7.7 ± 0.2	36.3 ± 0.5	0.25 ± 0.004	81.7 ± 1.2	0.56 ± 0.009
Summer	E. nitens	244 bark	5	43	2537 ± 124b	466 ± 31d	10.8 ± 0.7d	18.3 ± 0.5d	0.43 ± 0.012d	41.1 ± 1.4c	0.96 ± 0.032c
		244 debark	5	43	2468 ± 30b	463 ± 17d	10.8 ± 0.4d	18.8 ± 0.6d	0.44 ± 0.015d	39.1 ± 1.5c	0.91 ± 0.036c
		350 bark	5	43	3296 ± 85a	593 ± 26c	13.8 ± 0.6c	18.0 ± 0.4d	0.42 ± 0.008d	39.9 ± 0.6c	0.93 ± 0.014c
		350 debark	5	43	3373 ± 174a	635 ± 24bc	14.8 ± 0.6bc	18.9 ± 0.5d	0.44 ± 0.013d	38.9 ± 1.4c	0.91 ± 0.033c
	E. globulus	244 bark	5	43	2261 ± 56b	593 ± 5c	13.8 ± 0.1c	26.3 ± 0.5bc	0.61 ± 0.011bc	59.8 ± 1.3a	1.39 ± 0.030a
		244 debark	5	43	2445 ± 62b	727 ± 19b	16.9 ± 0.5b	29.7 ± 0.4a	0.69 ± 0.009a	58.7 ± 1.0ab	1.37 ± 0.023ab
		350 bark	5	43	3035 ± 104a	753 ± 28b	17.5 ± 0.6b	24.8 ± 0.6c	0.58 ± 0.013c	53.0 ± 1.5b	1.23 ± 0.035b
		350 debark	5	43	3233 ± 148a	900 ± 43a	20.9 ± 1.0a	27.8 ± 0.3ab	0.65 ± 0.008ab	53.8 ± 1.0b	1.25 ± 0.023b
		Mean	40		2831 ± 76	641 ± 24	14.9 ± 0.6	22.8 ± 0.7	0.53 ± 0.017	48.1 ± 1.4	1.12 ± 0.033
ANOVA/	Covariate				–	**	**	***	***	***	***
ANCOVA	S				***	***	***	***	***	***	***
	T				***	***	***	***	***	***	***
	S × T				***	***	***	***	***	***	***

Main and interactive effects of season (S) and treatment (T) were assessed by analysis of variance and covariance. The covariate was the number of logs per square metre in the pile cross-section. Significant differences are presented as ns non-significant, * significant at P < 0.05, and *** significant at P < 0.001. Values are presented as means (± 1 SE) for seasons and treatments. Separation of means was determined by a Tukey test when applicable. Different letters indicate significant differences at P < 0.05

Back to article page