Open Access

Effects of site, silviculture and seedlot on wood density and estimated wood stiffness in radiata pine at mid-rotation

  • Sue D Carson1,
  • Dave J Cown2,
  • Russell B McKinley2 and
  • John R Moore2Email author
New Zealand Journal of Forestry Science201444:26

https://doi.org/10.1186/s40490-014-0026-3

Received: 23 April 2014

Accepted: 13 October 2014

Published: 31 October 2014

Abstract

Background

To understand the underlying control of patterns of important wood properties is fundamental to silvicultural control of wood quality and genetic selection. This study examines the influences of site, silviculture and seedlot on diameter growth, wood density and estimated wood stiffness in mid-rotation radiata pine (Pinus radiata D Don) stands across New Zealand.

Methods

Selected treatment combinations were assessed across five sites in a 17-year-old experiment comparing silvicultural treatments and improved breeds of radiata pine. Diameter at breast height (DBH), and stress-wave velocity (an indicator of wood stiffness) and outerwood (outermost five growth rings) basic density at breast-height were assessed for ten trees from each plot in the experiment.

Results

There were large differences in DBH and wood properties between sites. Silviculture (stand density) had a stronger influence than seedlot on DBH and stress-wave velocity, while the converse applied to outerwood density. There was a positive relationship between stand density and both stress-wave velocity and outerwood density. Trees in the un-pruned 500 stems ha−1 treatment had larger DBH, lower outerwood density and lower stress-wave velocity than trees in the 400 stems ha−1 pruned treatment. This suggests that silvicultural manipulation (pruning) of green crown length is important for controlling both growth and wood properties.

Conclusions

Results from this study support previous research which indicates that thinning, and to a lesser extent pruning, have a strong impact on DBH, stress-wave velocity and outerwood density. Increasing stand density is consistently associated with stiffer and denser outerwood.

Keywords

Pinus radiata Silviculture Site Genotypes Wood density Stress-wave velocity

Background

Variation in wood characteristics within and between trees is affected by a number of factors including tree age (cambial ageing), environment (site and climate) and genetics (Downes and Drew [2008]; Larson [1969]; Zobel and Sprague [1998]). Some of these factors, such as the choice of genetic material and tree spacing, can be manipulated by silviculturalists to achieve desired wood-quality outcomes. Understanding environmental impacts on wood quality is also important, so that silvicultural regimes targeting particular end products can be developed for different sites. Several studies have documented the influence of site and climatic conditions on the growth and wood properties of radiata pine (Pinus radiata D. Don) (e.g. Cown et al. [1991]; Palmer et al. [2013]), which is the major commercial forestry species in New Zealand (Ministry for Primary Industries [2013]). Maps representing spatial variation in wood density of radiata pine in New Zealand have been developed, classifying the country into distinct zones (Cown et al. [1991]; Palmer et al. [2013]), primarily related to mean annual temperature.

The effects of silviculture and genetics on wood properties, particularly density, are often assumed to be a consequence of their impacts on radial growth rates. In radiata pine, as in many other softwood species, there is an adverse correlation between tree growth rate and wood density (Burdon and Harris [1973]). Trees grown at wider spacing generally have lower wood density compared with those grown at closer spacing (Cown [1974]) while differences have also been observed in other properties such as modulus of elasticity and microfibril angle (Lasserre et al. [2009]; Watt et al. [2011]). Wood-quality variation in radiata pine has been less studied from a genetic aspect, but most properties have been shown to be both highly variable and highly heritable (Apiolaza et al. [2013]; Kumar and Burdon [2010]). From a forest-management perspective, the combination of using faster growing genetically improved stock and the move to shorter rotation lengths, has placed emphasis on the resultant quality of the central core of juvenile wood (Burdon et al. [2004]; Cown [1992]; Lasserre et al. [2009]) as the trees grown under these conditions will have a higher proportion of juvenile wood.

Much of the earlier research into wood-property variation in radiata pine, and other species, focused on density due its relative ease of measurement and correlation with other wood properties (Cown et al. [2002]). However, modulus of elasticity is an important wood property that affects the performance of timber in structural applications. It is related to both density and microfibril angle, and can be estimated using stress-wave non-destructive techniques (Ross and Pellerin [1988]). Recent advances in portable acoustic tools have provided the ability to investigate variation of estimated wood stiffness (modulus of elasticity) in standing trees and logs (Wang [2013]; Wang et al. [2001]). While standing-tree velocity measurements are not as well correlated with the stiffness of the resulting sawn timber as resonance measurements made on logs (Wang [2013]), they can be applied to young trees, which permit more rapid assessment of the combined effects of silviculture and genetics early in the life of a stand. For example, Lasserre et al. ([2005]) found that both stand density and genotype significantly influenced the estimated stiffness of 11-year-old radiata pine clones established at initial stand densities ranging from 833 up to 2500 stems ha−1. They also noted a positive correlation between stiffness and stand density, independent of genotype. Conversely, in a 27-year-old radiata pine experiment established at 625 stems ha−1, which had some plots thinned to 100 stems ha−1 at mid-rotation, Grabianowski et al. ([2004]) found large tree-to-tree differences in estimated wood stiffness but no significant effect of stand density, despite a large contrast in stem diameter.

The interactions of the various influences on wood formation and properties remain an important aspect of radiata pine forestry. In particular, understanding the underlying control of patterns of important wood properties is fundamental to silvicultural control of wood quality. Using data from a national series of experiments, the main objective of the present study was to quantify site, silvicultural and seedlot (genetic) influences on diameter growth, wood density and estimated wood stiffness in mid-rotation radiata pine stands across New Zealand.

Methods

Experimental design

The study was based on a subset of sites and treatment combinations from a series of experiments that were established in 1987 to investigate the interaction of silviculture and genetics on growth of radiata pine. The design of these experiments is described in more detail by Carson et al. ([1999b]), who also presented some preliminary analysis results showing the relative effects of site, silviculture and genetics on stand basal area, height, and volume at age eight years (i.e. at approximately one-third rotation). These early analyses showed large site-level differences in height, basal area and volume compared with seedlot differences. In this study, five installations (sites) of the experiment were sampled that covered a range of climatic and soil conditions, and had contrasting site indices (Table 1; Figure 1). Three of these installations (Woodhill, Kaingaroa, Tahorakuri) were established on former forest sites, while the other two (Glengarry, Otago Coast) were established on ex-farm sites. At each of these installations, three silvicultural treatments were sampled (Table 2), in combination with three seedlots, representing high growth rate, stem straightness and a range of branching habits (Table 3).
Table 1

Characteristics of the sites from the 1987 silviculture-breeds experiments sampled in this study

Forest

Latitude

Mean annual rainfall (mm)

Mean temperature1(°C) (range)

Elevation (m a.s.l.)

Mean wind speed1(km/h)

Mean solar radiation2(MJ/m2)

Mean relative humidity2(%)

Previous land use3

Site index4

Age at thinning (years)

Woodhill

36°30′

1495

14.0 (18–10)

80

8.7

13.8

84.3

Forest

Medium

5.6

Tahorakuri

38°20′

1254

12.0 (17–7)

450

7.0

13.4

84.7

Forest

Medium

4.9

Kaingaroa

39°10′

1618

10.2 (15–5)

750

7.0

13.4

84.8

Forest

Low

6.8

Glengarry

41°30′

1515

12.7 (17–8)

500

10.5

13.5

72.8

Farm

High

4.8

Otago coast

46°00′

781

10.0 (14–6)

150

14.4

11.0

79.3

Farm

High

6.9

1Mean of monthly averages.

2Mean of daily averages.

3Former farm sites have higher fertility than forest sites.

4Relative to sites in the same region.

Figure 1

Location of the five installations of the 1987 silviculture-breeds experiment that were sampled in this study.

Table 2

Silvicultural treatments in the 1987 silviculture-breeds experiments

Treatment

Stand density (stems ha-1)

Crown remaining after pruning (m)

Outer plot size (ha)

Inner plot size (ha)

No. of trees3

 

Initial

Post-thinning2

    

1

250 or 5001

100

4

0.324

0.196

98

2

1000

400

4

0.081

0.049

49

3

500

500

No pruning

0.162

0.098

49

1Initial stand density was 500 stems ha-1 at Woodhill, Tahorakuri and Glengarry.

2Thinning was carried out at a mean stand height of approximately 6.2 m.

3Number of trees in inner permanent sample plot before thinning.

Table 3

Descriptions of the seedlots in the 1987 silviculture-breeds experiment that were assessed in this study

Seedlot

Breed

GF rating

GFPlus ratings1

   

Diameter

Stem form

Branching

3/3/85/01

Multinodal

GF14

17.5

19

21

6/3/86/46

Multinodal

GF21

21.2

21

23

9/3/86/166

Long Internode

LI28 (GF13)

17.7

18

1

1GF Plus ratings are assigned by the Radiata Pine Breeding Company based on breeding values for traits of interest.

The three seedlots that were genetically improved for growth rate and stem form had not undergone direct selection for wood properties, so were not expected to differ greatly from one another for wood properties. However, selection for improved growth rate may have indirectly and unconsciously `selected' for reduced wood density in these seedlots when compared to unimproved seedlots, due to the negative genetic correlation between wood density and diameter growth rate (Burdon [2010]). Seedlot 1 was rated by the New Zealand Seed Certification Service as GF14 (Jayawickrama and Carson [2000]), seedlot 2 was rated as GF21. The GF rating system was developed to enable genetic quality of alternative seedlots to be differentiated, and was based on a one-third weighting for stem form and a two-thirds weighting for growth rate, where a higher number reflects a higher level of genetic improvement. The GF14 seedlot contained seed collected from an open-pollinated clonal seed orchard, whereas the GF21 seedlot was produced by controlled-pollination among several seed orchard parents. Seedlot 3 was rated as GF13, and was the result of controlled pollination among parents selected primarily for exceptionally long internodes as well as increased growth. This third seedlot represents a `long internode' breed and is also given a long internode (LI) rating of LI28. Ratings of genetic worth reported in Table 3 also include the more recently derived GF Plus ratings for the seedlots used in this study. As distinct from the GF ratings, GF Plus ratings are allocated by individual trait, but they are similar with respect to the convention that higher values represent greater genetic improvement.

Plots within the experiment were established at stand densities ranging from 250 to 1000 stems ha−1. However, at three of the sites (Woodhill, Tahorakuri and Glengarry) the most widely spaced treatments were established at 500 stems ha−1. Plot sizes ranged from 0.081 ha up to 0.324 ha (including buffers) with the inner plot sizes (that included the measurement trees) ranging in size from 0.049 ha up to 0.196 ha (Table 2). When the mean tree height reached 6.2 m, plots were thinned to stand densities ranging from 100 to 400 stems ha−1. This gave a ratio of pre- to post-thinning stand density of 5:2. Trees were also pruned at this time to leave approximately 4 m of green crown remaining. This corresponded to a pruned height of approximately 2.2 m; typically radiata pine is pruned to a height of 6 m in three lifts, so the intensity of pruning in this experiment is less than would occur in practice. In one treatment (500 stems ha−1), plots were not thinned or pruned and were left at their initial stand density of 500 stems ha−1. Each treatment combination was replicated twice at each site. One replicate from four treatment combinations could not be sampled (GF13 and GF14 100 stems ha−1 at Otago Coast, GF14 400 and 500 stems ha−1 at Tahorakuri), so that a total of 86 plots were sampled.

Growth and wood properties assessment

At age 17 years after planting (i.e. approximately half to two-thirds of the typical rotation length for radiata pine in New Zealand), ten trees were selected at random from each treatment plot and their diameter at breast height (DBH) measured. Stress-wave velocity measurements were made on each tree using the IML Hammer (Instrumenta Mechanic Labor GmbH, Germany). Two sets of measurements were made on the north and south sides of each tree. These measurements were centred about breast height (1.4 m) and the probes of the instrument were spaced approximately 1 m apart along the longitudinal axis of the stem. These two measurements were averaged to give a single value for each tree. An outerwood increment core (5 mm in diameter) was collected at breast height from each tree. This core contained the five outermost annual rings (approximately 50 mm in length) and is the standard density sample collected from standing trees in New Zealand (Cown and McConchie [1983]). For trees with any obvious lean, cores were collected on the upper stem-side in order to avoid compression wood. In some plots it was not possible to collect cores from all ten trees and, therefore, a total of 854 of core samples were collected. All individual outerwood segments were assessed for basic density (kg m−3) using the maximum moisture content method (Smith [1954]) without resin extraction.

Data analysis

Average values by site, silviculture, and seedlot were calculated for all measured traits. A variance-components analysis was conducted to determine how much variation was associated with each stratum in the experiment, i.e. site, replicate within site, plot within replicate and tree within plot. Analyses of variance were then used to examine the differences in trait expression assuming a randomised complete block structure. For each trait, analyses were carried out for all sites following the same approach described in Carson et al. ([1999b]). Sources of variation included main effects of site, replication within site, silviculture, and seedlot. Interaction effects of site by silviculture, site by seedlot, silviculture by seedlot, and the three-way interaction were also included. Site and replication within site were treated as random effects, while seedlot and silviculture were treated as fixed effects. Seedlot was tested against the site by seedlot interaction, and silviculture against the site by silviculture interaction. Analyses of growth traits were based on all trees in a treatment, rather than just the sample selected for wood properties assessment. For the 100 and 400 stems ha−1 treatments, approximately 20 trees were assessed for growth, while approximately 49 were assessed in the 500 stems ha−1 treatment. Simple correlation analysis was also used to test for potential relationships between outerwood density and stress-wave velocity, and between radial growth rate and both outerwood density and stress-wave velocity.

Results

The greatest single source of variation in outwerwood density and stress-wave velocity was differences among individual trees within a plot, followed by differences among sites (Table 4). Differences among treatments accounted for 13.4 and 26.1 % of the variation in outerwood density and stress-wave velocity, respectively. The greatest source of variation in DBH was the difference among treatment plots, followed by the difference among trees within a plot and then site. At each of the five individual sites, there was more variation in DBH and stress-wave velocity among silvicultural treatments than among seedlots, while the converse situation was observed for outerwood density (Figure 2).
Table 4

Percentage of total variation in DBH, stress-wave velocity and breast height outerwood density attributable to each stratum in the experiment

Stratum

Percentage of variation attributable to each stratum

 

DBH

Stress-wave velocity

Outerwood density

Site

27.1

32.9

41.4

Rep within site

0.00

0.00

0.00

Plot within rep

44.9

26.1

13.4

Tree within plot

28.0

41.0

45.2

Figure 2

Range of treatment-level average values of DBH, stress-wave velocity (SWV) and outerwood density (OWD) at each of the five sites. The overall range across the five sites is also given.

Site-level differences

The five sites assessed represented a range of performance for growth and wood properties (Table 5). Site mean DBH and outerwood density showed a relatively large range, from 366 (Kaingaroa) to 475 mm (Glengarry) for DBH and 375 (Kaingaroa) to 451 kg m−3 (Woodhill) for outerwood density. Outerwood density values showed a strong regional trend with increasing latitude (and elevation). Site mean stress-wave velocity ranged from 2035 m s−1 (Otago Coast) to 2487 m s−1 (Woodhill). Site differences were highly significant for all traits assessed (Table 6).
Table 5

Values of diameter at breast height, breast height outerwood density and stress-wave velocity by site, seedlot and silvicultural regime

Stand density (stems ha−1)

Seedlot and site

Woodhill

Kaingaroa

Tahorakuri

Glengarry

Otago coast

 

GF13

GF14

GF21

Mean

GF13

GF14

GF21

Mean

GF13

GF14

GF21

Mean

GF13

GF14

GF21

Mean

GF13

GF14

GF21

Mean

DBH (mm)

                    

100

484 (476)

460 (441)

458 (443)

467 (455)

420 (407)

442 (437)

434 (424)

432 (423)

509 (508)

529 (532)

507 (487)

520 (509)

586 (577)

621 (597)

600 (596)

602 (590)

473 (474)

558 (541)

512 (499)

496 (505)

400

335 (334)

347 (346)

349 (350)

343 (345)

324 (326)

335 (341)

346 (343)

335 (337)

369 (362)

395 (385)

383 (386)

382 (378)

403 (419)

435 (441)

412 (416)

398 (426)

403 (405)

398 (388)

398 (404)

400 (399)

500

354 (323)

355 (352)

337 (335)

348 (337)

317 (335)

345 (362)

332 (349)

331 (348)

389 (387)

385 (374)

388 (423)

387 (399)

416 (440)

426 (450)

432 (441)

425 (444)

317 (382)

398 (395)

397 (416)

371 (397)

Mean

391 (378)

387 (380)

381 (377)

386 (378)

353 (356)

374 (380)

370 (372)

366 (369)

424 (419)

438 (435)

427 (432)

430 (429)

468 (479)

476 (496)

481 (484)

475 (487)

391 (426)

445 (436)

430 (440)

422 (434)

Stress Wave Velocity (km s −1 )

               

100

2392

2400

2376

2390

2133

2042

2070

2081

2180

2042

2247

2156

2235

2146

2399

2259

2055

2027

2005

2029

400

2581

2785

2649

2672

2374

2340

2357

2357

2558

2375

2384

2439

2609

2439

2650

2566

2104

2096

2129

2110

500

2351

2372

2474

2399

2006

2008

2016

2010

2293

2182

2231

2236

2158

2170

2305

2211

1945

1878

2028

1967

Mean

2441

2515

2504

2487

2170

2130

2148

2150

2343

2201

2286

2277

2334

2251

2450

2345

2047

2005

2054

2035

Outerwood Density (kg m −3 )

                

100

449

436

423

436

382

352

361

365

382

366

376

375

392

350

358

367

394

365

367

375

400

483

436

464

461

398

364

377

380

419

378

390

395

408

372

409

397

395

381

376

384

500

492

418

461

457

378

361

385

379

408

381

383

390

394

375

399

389

414

383

380

393

Mean

475

430

450

451

386

364

374

375

403

375

382

387

398

366

388

384

401

376

375

384

The values of diameter at breast are given for all trees in the plot as well as those selected for measurement of wood properties (in parentheses).

Table 6

Analysis of variance results for diameter at breast height, stress wave velocity and outerwood density across all sites

  

Diameter at breast height

Stress wave velocity

Outerwood density

Source

df

F

P > F

F

P > F

F

P > F

Site

4

66.96

0.0002

27.62

0.0013

148.78

<0.0001

Seedlot

2

11.30

0.0015

4.26

0.0219

52.70

<0.0001

Silviculture

2

750.88

<0.0001

80.84

<0.0001

27.32

<0.0001

Site × Seedlot

8

3.47

0.0046

2.28

0.0435

1.99

0.0757

Site × Silviculture

8

15.03

<0.0001

2.47

0.0304

0.98

0.4697

Silviculture × Seedlot

4

2.48

0.0608

0.55

0.7029

1.01

0.4129

Site × Silviculture × Seedlot

16

2.38

0.0154

0.85

0.6245

2.20

0.0250

Differences among silvicultural treatments

In the thinned treatments there was a clear trend of decreasing DBH with increasing stand density (Table 5; Figure 3). However, the un-pruned, un-thinned 500 stems ha−1 treatment did not adhere to this trend. Overall they had the same mean DBH as the 400 stems ha−1 treatment, although differences were observed at some sites, i.e. Glengarry, Kaingaroa and Tahorakuri (Figure 3). Stress wave velocity increased as stand density increased from 100 stems ha−1 up to 400 stems ha−1 (Table 5). Again, the un-pruned, un-thinned 500 stems ha−1 treatment did not appear to adhere to this trend, yielding on average a slightly lower velocity even than for the 100 stems ha−1 treatment. This trend was consistent across each of the five sites (Figure 3). Outerwood density was also significantly different among silvicultural treatments, but the effect was not as strong as for DBH (Table 6). In the treatments that had been thinned, there was a trend at all sites for higher stocked stands to have higher densities in the outerwood but not for the un-thinned controls (Figure 3).
Figure 3

Variation in DBH, stress-wave velocity and outerwood density with stand density at each of the five sites. Data have been averaged across all seedlots and error bars have been omitted for clarity.

Differences among seedlots

There were small differences in DBH among seedlots with GF13 (LI28) trees having a smaller mean diameter than those from the G14 and GF21 seedlots (Table 5). There was a significant site × seedlot interaction on DBH (Table 6). Stress-wave velocity also differed among seedlots. Across all sites and silvicultural regimes the GF21 seedlot had the highest average stress-wave velocity (2288 m s−1) and the GF14 seedlot the lowest (2221 m s−1). There was a small site × seedlot interaction, with GF13 having the highest stress-wave velocity at the Kaingaroa and Tahorakuri sites (Figure 4). Outerwood density also differed significantly between seedlots (Tables 5 and 6). The long internode (LI28) GF13 seedlot consistently had the highest outerwood density on all sites, and the GF14 seedlot almost always had the lowest (Table 5, Figure 4). There was no evidence of a site × seedlot interaction for outerwood density, or a silviculture × seedlot interaction for any of the traits assessed (Table 6).
Figure 4

Mean values of DBH, stress-wave velocity and outerwood density by seedlot for each of the five sites. Data have been averaged across all levels of stand density.

Inter-relationships between growth and wood quality traits

The correlation between wood density in the outer five rings and stress-wave velocity was highly significant (r = 0.29-0.61 across individual sites and 0.52 across all sites combined). The correlation was strongest at the Tahorakuri site, but much weaker at both the Kaingaroa and Woodhill sites (Figure 5). Across the experiment as a whole, there were weak negative relationships between average ring width and both stress-wave velocity (r = −0.29) (Figure 5) and outerwood density (r = −0.29) (Figure 6). The correlation between ring width and outerwood density appeared to be less pronounced in the 100 stems ha−1 treatment, compared with the 400 and 500 stems ha−1 treatments (Figure 6).
Figure 5

Relationship between breast height outerwood density and stress-wave velocity in individual trees. Data are presented for each site × silviculture combination and the solid line was fitted using a locally weighted smoothing function (lowess).

Figure 6

Relationship between the average width of the outer five rings and breast height outerwood density in individual trees. Data are presented for each site × silviculture combination and the solid line was fitted using a locally weighted smoothing function (lowess).

Discussion

Significant differences among sites, silvicultural regimes, and seedlots were observed for all growth and wood property traits assessed in this experiment. It should be remembered in all of the following discussion that wood properties were measured only in the lower stem where wood property responses to external influences tend to be at a maximum (Cown [1973], [1974]). Across the experiment as a whole, both site and silviculture had the greatest effects on DBH and wood properties. Most of the results conformed to expectations, i.e. a reduction in wood density with latitude and elevation, driven by mean annual temperature (Palmer et al. [2013]), and increasing outerwood density and stress-wave velocity in higher stocked stands. This increase in wood density and stress-wave velocity with increasing stand density has previously been reported in radiata pine (Grace and Evans [2012]; Waghorn et al. [2007]; Watt et al. [2011]), but is in contrast to another study in young radiata pine which found no effect of stand density (across a range from 833 to 2500 stems ha−1) on wood density (Lasserre et al. [2009]).

For DBH and stress-wave velocity, the un-pruned, un-thinned 500 stems ha−1 treatment did not appear to conform to the trends observed with stand density. This same lack of fit to the trend was observed at all six sites when growth data initially collected eight years from planting were analysed (Carson et al. [1999b]). Results from the current study indicate that stand density manipulation interacts with pruning to affect wood properties as similar values of outerwood density were observed in the 400 and 500 stems ha−1 treatments. Previously, it has been suggested that pruning may increase wood density (Cown [1973]; Gartner et al. [2003]), in line with the concept of "crown-formed" wood (Amarasekara and Denne [2002]; Gartner et al. [2002]), whereby wood laid down within an active crown retains the characteristic properties of juvenile wood (i.e. wide growth rings, low wood density, high microfibril angle). It is clear that, apart from affecting intrinsic wood properties directly, factors that result in accelerated growth such as thinning or genetic improvement in particular could increase the actual volume of juvenile wood in stems (Cown [1974]; Kennedy et al. [2013]). This increase in the proportional size of the juvenile wood core is probably more significant for log utilisation than the quantitative changes to individual wood properties (Cown [1992]).

The overall strong trend between stress-wave velocity (assumed to be only estimating the stiffness of the outerwood) and stand density implies a solid relationship between the latter and timber stiffness, in line with results from other studies (Lasserre et al. [2005]; Watt et al. [2010]). The current results, however, do not support the findings from another study in New Zealand (Grabianowski et al. [2004]) or the results from a mature spacing study in Chile (Soto et al. [2012]) which concluded that initial stand density (2500, 1667, 833 and 625 stems ha−1 across four sites) did not influence stress-wave velocity. This raises the possibility that site type may have an influence on silvicultural response. The apparently anomalous result for the un-pruned treatment also requires comment. While the outerwood density values showed a fairly clear trend with stand density, the un-pruned, un-thinned 500 stems ha−1 treatment had consistently and significantly lower stress-wave velocity readings that were similar to the values in the 100 stems ha−1 treatment. Published studies to date suggest that the influence of branches on stress-wave velocity measurements should be insignificant, or at best minimal. For example, Lasserre et al. ([2007]) have indicated a 6-8 % decrease in stress-wave velocity due to the presence of branches, which would assist in interpreting the results, but Auty and Achim ([2008]) have demonstrated little effect of branches on these readings. In the current study, a likely explanation is that the greater crown area has resulted in a higher proportion of "crown-formed" wood with lower basic wood density and higher moisture content (and hence, higher green density). Green density in combination with stress-wave velocity is used to calculate longitudinal modulus of elasticity. If green density is higher than the value of 1000 kg m−3 that is frequently assumed, then wood stiffness will be underestimated for a given stress-wave velocity (Wang [2013]; Wang et al. [2001]).

The original experiment on which the current study is based was designed to estimate site and silvicultural impacts on commercially available seedlots (to elicit realised genetic gain), rather than for comparison of seedlots per se. In general, these large-plot trials (8 × 8 trees) have a low power for detecting seedlot differences, due to the large amount of site variance typically confounding genetic differences (Carson et al. [1999a]). For ranking genotypes, breeders typically use single-tree-plot designs, in which genetic differences are detected with much greater precision, especially for traits like DBH that are highly influenced by the environment (Carson et al. [1999b]). In addition, only a subset of plots and trees within these plots were sampled in the current study, which would have further reduced the power to detect differences between seedlots. Despite this, significant (although not highly so) differences were observed between the seedlots examined in this study for all the growth and wood quality traits that were assessed. Genetic differences have been repeatedly shown to be highly significant in single-tree progeny trials that breeders use for selection for DBH, wood density, stress-wave velocity, and straightness (Dungey et al. [2009]). The seedlots in this experiment were chosen to be genetically different in growth and straightness, but were not chosen to be genetically different in either wood density or stress-wave velocity. However, consistent and relatively large differences in density were noted, even with this less powerful design. In particular, the long-internode (LI28) GF13 seedlot consistently had the highest and the GF14 seedlot the lowest wood density. The GF14 seedlot also had the lowest stress-wave velocity, but the only significant difference was with the GF21 seedlot. Other studies comparing seedlots, families and/or clones confirm that there are large genetic differences in stress-wave velocity (Chauhan et al. [2013]; Lenz et al. [2013]).

Across the trial as a whole, there was a consistent but weak negative relationship between radial growth and stress-wave velocity. In previous radiata pine studies there are conflicting results, with some reporting a strong relationship (Lasserre et al. [2005]; Watt et al. [2011]) and others reporting no effect (Grabianowski et al. [2004]; Soto et al. [2012]). In this study there was no indication of a strong site effect on this relationship. On the other hand, many previous studies have proven a negative relationship between wood density and growth rate in conifers (e.g. Brazier [1970]; Cown et al. [1991]; Johansson [1993]; Yang [1994]; Zhang et al. [2002]). The current study again confirmed a weak negative correlation for radiata pine across sites, treatments and seedlots, notwithstanding the possible existence of an associated negative genetic correlation, which could not be tested in this study. The difference in response between wood density and stress-wave velocity (both related to wood stiffness) can be attributed to the fact that the two measures, while both taken at breast height, actually represent slightly different samples of the stem-wood. Outerwood increment cores are a biological sample incorporating the most recent five growth rings whereas stress-wave values represent a portion of the outer sapwood, approximately 50 mm in thickness (Paradis et al. [2013]). These assessments are not necessarily sampling the same wood, particularly since the stress-wave value can be influenced by moisture content and the presence of reaction wood (Paradis and Murphy [2013]).

Conclusion

In conclusion, results from this study support previous research which indicates that thinning, and to a lesser extent pruning, have a strong impact on DBH, stress-wave velocity and outerwood density. Increasing stand density is consistently associated with stiffer and denser outerwood. Models for predicting wood properties, specifically stress-wave velocity and wood density, also require stand density to be taken into account. Ideally, seedlot information should also be included in predictive growth and wood quality models, as even with the limited data collected in the current study, the seedlots registered some significant effects. Both stress-wave velocity and wood density were found to be highly sensitive to site, silviculture and seedlot influences, and these traits could potentially be used together to identify material which has both high density and high stress-wave velocity.

The results presented here were obtained by sampling a subset of the treatments at five of the six sites in this experiment. The experiment is now reaching maturity and this presents an opportunity to undertake intensive measurements to determine the effects of the various treatment factors on both the wood properties of the trees and performance of the timber cut from them. This will provide important information to forest managers who are trying to maximise their financial returns by maximising the volume of fit-for-purpose timber they grow. Ideally, all treatment combinations should be sampled as they cover a wider range of stand densities and would also enable pruned and un-pruned stands growing at the same stand density to be compared.

Authors' contributions

SDC conceived the idea for the study, assisted with the data analysis and writing of the manuscript. DJC and RBMcK planned the wood quality assessment and the interpretation of the results. JRM assisted with the data analysis and writing of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final version of the manuscript.

Declarations

Acknowledgments

The 1987 silviculture-breeds experiment was designed by Dr Mike Carson, who also provided comments on an earlier version of the manuscript. The authors wish to acknowledge Wood Quality Initiative Ltd. who funded the original study and allowed publication of the results. Funding for publication of the results was also provided by Future Forests Research Ltd. Assistance with the field work was given by Pat Hodgkiss, John Lee and Dave Henley (Scion), and Jody Wharekura (contractor). Judy Hayes (Carson Associates) and Mark Kimberley (Scion) contributed to the statistical analyses. Bob Shula and three anonymous reviewers provided comments on an earlier version of the manuscript.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Carson Associates Ltd.
(2)
Scion

References

  1. Amarasekara H, Denne MP: Effects of crown size on wood characteristics of Corsican pine in relation to definitions of juvenile wood, crown formed wood and core wood. Forestry 2002,75(1):51–61. 10.1093/forestry/75.1.51View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  2. Apiolaza LA, Chuahan S, Hayes M, Nakada R, Sharma M, Walker J: Selection and breeding for wood quality: a new approach. New Zealand Journal of Forestry 2013,58(1):32–37.Google Scholar
  3. Auty D, Achim A: The relationship between standing tree acoustic assessment and timber quality in Scots pine and the practical implications for assessing timber quality from naturally regenerated stands. Forestry 2008,81(4):475–487. 10.1093/forestry/cpn015View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  4. Brazier JD: Timber improvement: II. The effect of vigour on young-growth Sitka spruce. Forestry 1970, 43: 135–150. 10.1093/forestry/43.2.135View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  5. Burdon RD: Wood properties and genetic improvement of radiata pine. New Zealand Journal of Forestry 2010,55(2):22–27.Google Scholar
  6. Burdon RD, Harris JM: Wood density in radiata pine clones on four different sites. New Zealand Journal of Forestry Science 1973,3(3):286–303.Google Scholar
  7. Burdon R, Walker J, Megraw B, Evans R, Cown D: Juvenile wood (sensu novo) in pine: conflicts and possible opportunities for growing, processing and utilisation. New Zealand Journal of Forestry 2004,49(3):24–31.Google Scholar
  8. Carson SD, Garcia O, Hayes JD: Realized gain and prediction of yield with genetically improved Pinus radiata in New Zealand. Forest Science 1999, 45: 186–200.Google Scholar
  9. Carson SD, Kimberley MO, Hayes JD, Carson MJ: The effect of silviculture on genetic gain in growth of Pinus radiata at one-third rotation. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 1999,29(12):1979–1984. doi:10.1139/x99–152 10.1139/x99-152View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  10. Chauhan SS, Sharma M, Thomas J, Apiolaza LA, Collings DA, Walker JCF: Methods for the very early selection of Pinus radiata D. Don. for solid wood products. Annals of Forest Science 2013,70(4):439–449. doi:10.1007/s13595–013–0270–3 10.1007/s13595-013-0270-3View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  11. Cown DJ: Effects of severe thinning and pruning treatments on the intrinsic wood properties of young radiata pine. New Zealand Journal of Forestry Science 1973,3(3):379–389.Google Scholar
  12. Cown DJ: Comparison of the effects of two thinning regimes on some wood properties of radiata pine. New Zealand Journal of Forestry Science 1974, 4: 540–551.Google Scholar
  13. Cown DJ: Corewood (juvenile wood) in Pinus radiata - should we be concerned? New Zealand Journal of Forestry Science 1992,22(1):87–95.Google Scholar
  14. Cown DJ, McConchie DL: Radiata Pine Wood Properties Survey (1979 to 1982). FRI Bulletin 50. New Zealand Forest Service, Forest Research Institute, Rotorua, New Zealand; 1983.Google Scholar
  15. Cown DJ, McConchie DL, Young GD: Radiata Pine Wood Properties Survey. FRI Bulletin 50. Ministry of Forestry, Forest Research Institute, Rotorua; 1991.Google Scholar
  16. Cown DJ, McKinley RB, Ball RD: Wood density variation in 10 mature Pinus radiata clones. New Zealand Journal of Forestry Science 2002,32(1):48–69.Google Scholar
  17. Downes G, Drew DM: Climate and growth influences on wood formation and utilisation. Southern Forests 2008,70(2):155–167. 10.2989/SOUTH.FOR.2008.70.2.11.539View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  18. Dungey HS, Brawner JT, Burger F, Carson M, Henson M, Jefferson P, Matheson AC: A new breeding strategy for Pinus radiata in New Zealand and New South Wales. Silvae Genetica 2009,58(1–2):28–38.Google Scholar
  19. Gartner BL, North EM, Johnson GR, Singleton R: Effects of live crown on vertical patterns of wood density and growth in Douglas-fir. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 2002, 32: 439–447. doi:10.1139/x01–218 10.1139/x01-218View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  20. Gartner B, Robbins JM, Newton M: Effects of pruning on wood density and tracheid length in young Douglas-fir. Wood and Fiber Science 2003,37(2):304–313.Google Scholar
  21. Grabianowski M, Manley B, Walker J: Impact of stocking and exposure on outerwood acoustic properties of Pinus radiata in Eyrewell forest. New Zealand Journal of Forestry 2004,49(2):13–17.Google Scholar
  22. Grace JC, Evans R: Impact of thinning and pruning on selected wood properties in individual radiata pine trees in New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Forestry Science 2012, 42: 117–129.Google Scholar
  23. Jayawickrama KJS, Carson MJ: A breeding strategy for the New Zealand radiata pine breeding cooperative. Silvae Genetica 2000,49(2):82–90.Google Scholar
  24. Johansson K: Influence of initial spacing and tree class on the basic density of Picea abies . Scandanavian Journal of Forest Research 1993, 8: 18–27. 10.1080/02827589309382752View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  25. Kennedy SG, Cameron AD, Lee SJ: Genetic relationships between wood quality traits and diameter growth of juvenile core wood in Sitka spruce. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 2013,43(1):1–6. 10.1139/cjfr-2012-0308View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  26. Kumar S, Burdon RD: Genetic improvement of stiffness of radiata pine: synthesis of results from acoustic assessments. New Zealand Journal of Forestry Science 2010, 40: 185–197.Google Scholar
  27. Larson PR: Wood Formation and the Concept of Wood Quality. Yale University School of Forestry Bulletin No. 74. 1969.Google Scholar
  28. Lasserre J-P, Mason EG, Watt MS: The effects of genotype and spacing on Pinus radiata [D. Don] corewood stiffness in an 11-year old experiment. Forest Ecology and Management 2005,205(1–3):375–383. doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2004.10.037 10.1016/j.foreco.2004.10.037View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  29. Lasserre JP, Mason EG, Watt MS: Assessing corewood acoustic velocity and modulus of elasticity with two impact based instruments in 11-year-old trees from a clonal-spacing experiment of Pinus radiata D. Don. Forest Ecology and Management 2007,239(1–3):217–221. 10.1016/j.foreco.2006.12.009View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  30. Lasserre JP, Mason EG, Watt MS, Moore JR: Influence of initial planting spacing and genotype on microfibril angle, wood density, fibre properties and modulus of elasticity in Pinus radiata D. Don corewood. Forest Ecology and Management 2009,258(9):1924–1931. doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2009.07.028 10.1016/j.foreco.2009.07.028View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  31. Lenz P, Auty D, Achim A, Beaulieu J, Mackay J: Genetic improvement of white spruce mechanical wood traits—early screening by means of acoustic velocity. Forests 2013,4(3):575–594. doi:10.3390/f4030575 10.3390/f4030575View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  32. National Exotic Forest Description as at 1 April 2013. Ministry for Primary Industries, Wellington; 2013.Google Scholar
  33. Palmer DJ, Kimberley MO, Cown DJ, McKinley RB: Assessing prediction accuracy in a regression kriging surface of Pinus radiata outerwood density across New Zealand. Forest Ecology and Management 2013, 308: 9–16. 10.1016/j.foreco.2013.07.024View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  34. Paradis N, Murphy GE: Effects of curvature in hybrid poplar on acoustic velocity at the tree level. New Zealand Journal of Forestry Science 2013,43(1):7. doi:10.1186/1179–5395–43–7 10.1186/1179-5395-43-7View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  35. Paradis N, Auty D, Carter P, Achim A: Using a standing-tree acoustic tool to identify forest stands for the production of mechanically-graded lumber. Sensors (Basel) 2013,13(3):3394–3408. doi:10.3390/s130303394 10.3390/s130303394View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  36. Ross RJ, Pellerin RF: NDE of wood-based composites with longitudinal stress waves. Forest Products Journal 1988,38(5):39–45.Google Scholar
  37. Smith DM: Maximum moisture content method for determining specific gravity of small wood samples. (Report 2014). United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest Products Laboratory, Madison, WI; 1954.Google Scholar
  38. Soto L, Valenzuela L, Lasserre JP: Effect of initial planting density in dynamic modulus of elasticity in standing trees and logs of 28 years old radiata pine plantation in sandy soil, Chile. Maderas. Ciencia y Tecnología 2012,14(2):209–220. doi:10.4067/S0718–221X2012000200008 10.4067/S0718-221X2012000200008View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  39. Waghorn MJ, Watt MS, Mason EG: Influence of tree morphology, genetics, and initial stand density on outerwood modulus of elasticity of 17-year-old Pinus radiata . Forest Ecology and Management 2007,244(1–3):86–92. doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2007.03.057 10.1016/j.foreco.2007.03.057View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  40. Wang X: Acoustic measurements on trees and logs: a review and analysis. Wood Science and Technology 2013,47(5):965–975. doi:10.1007/s00226–013–0552–9 10.1007/s00226-013-0552-9View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  41. Wang X, Ross RJ, McClennan M, Barbour RJ, Erickson JR, Forsman JW, McGinnis GD: Non-destructive evaluation of standing trees with stress wave methods. Wood and Fiber Science 2001, 33: 522–533.Google Scholar
  42. Watt MS, Sorensson C, Cown DJ, Dungey HS, Evans R: Determining the main and interactive effect of age and clone on wood density, microfibril angle, and modulus of elasticity for Pinus radiata . Canadian Journal of Forest Research 2010,40(8):1550–1557. doi:10.1139/x10–095 10.1139/X10-095View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  43. Watt MS, Zoric B, Kimberley MO, Harrington J: Influence of stocking on radial and longitudinal variation in modulus of elasticity, microfibril angle, and density in a 24-year-old Pinus radiata thinning trial. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 2011,41(7):1422–1431. doi:10.1139/x11–070 10.1139/x11-070View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  44. Yang K-C: Impact of spacing on width and basal area of juvenile and mature wood in Picea mariana and Picea glauca . Wood and Fiber Science 1994,26(4):479–488.Google Scholar
  45. Zhang SY, Chauret G, Ren QH, Desjardins R: Impact of initial spacing on plantation black spruce lumber grade yield, bending properties, and MSR yield. Wood and Fiber Science 2002,34(4):460–475.Google Scholar
  46. Zobel BJ, Sprague JR: Juvenile Wood in Forest Trees. Springer, Berlin; 1998.View ArticleGoogle Scholar

Copyright

© Carson et al.; licensee Springer. 2014

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited.