Histochemical and geometric alterations of sapwood in coastal Douglas-fir following mechanical damage during commercial thinning
Kiser J. (2011). Histochemical and geometric alterations of sapwood in coastal Douglas-fir following mechanical damage during commercial thinning. Silva Fennica vol. 45 no. 4 article id 447. https://doi.org/10.14214/sf.447
Histochemical and geometric alterations to sapwood in mechanically damaged Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii [Mirbel] Franco) trees were quantified 14 years after thinning. Discoloration and decay were measured in felled damaged and undamaged trees. Compartmentalized walls were identified and measured macroscopically. Sapwood to heartwood ratio was measured incrementally along the boles. Results showed a distinct reaction zone forming at the time of injury. Compartmentalized walls 1–3 were less distinct and heavily resinous streaking was evident in extant tissues, particularly in the axial direction. Post-damaged sapwood was burl-like for 4–6 years and tracheids contained resin-filled lumina. Damaged wood volumes were modeled by multiple regression. Wound depth, wound area, and diameter inside bark (DIB) accounted for 73% of the discolored volume (p = 0.02). DIB alone accounted for just over 55% of the response. Post-damaged sapwood averaged 15 mm (SE = 2.3 mm) greater in width on the side opposite the damage along the length of the boards. Wound area explained just over 65% of this response (p = 0.003). Sapwood area was not significantly different between damaged and control trees (p = 0.56). Results indicate that wounded Douglas-fir trees may slow conversion of sapwood to heartwood on the bole side opposite the wound, possibly as a response to maintain sapwood area necessary for physiological maintenance of the existing crown. About 19% of the lower bole volume in damaged trees was affected by discoloration and secondarily by structural changes. Reduction in value of the lower log can be as high as 19% by conventional bucking practices. Alternatives are presented to reduce the value loss to between 2.5% to 3.5%.
Received 12 November 2009 Accepted 12 July 2011 Published 31 December 2011