Index of Species Information
SPECIES: Betula alleghaniensis
Introductory
SPECIES: Betula alleghaniensis
AUTHORSHIP AND CITATION :
Sullivan, Janet. 1994. Betula alleghaniensis. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online].
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station,
Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available:
https://www.fs.usda.gov/database/feis/plants/tree/betall/all.html [].
ABBREVIATION :
BETALL
SYNONYMS :
Betula lutea Michx. [76]
B. alleghaniensis var. macrolepis (Fern) Brayshaw [76,131]
SCS PLANT CODE :
BEAL2
BEALA
BEALF
BEALM
COMMON NAMES :
yellow birch
swamp birch
silver birch
gray birch
TAXONOMY :
The currently accepted scientific name of yellow birch is Betula
alleghaniensis Britt. [14,76]. A recognized form is B. a. forma fallax
(Fassett) Brayshaw [131].
Yellow birch hybridizes with low birch (B. pumila L. var. glandulifera
Reg.). The hybrid is named B. xpurpusii C. K. Schneid [76]. An
additional entity formed by a backcross of B. xpurpusii and B.
alleghaniensis has also been named: B. xmurrayana Barnes & Dancik [44].
LIFE FORM :
Tree
FEDERAL LEGAL STATUS :
No special status
OTHER STATUS :
NO-ENTRY
DISTRIBUTION AND OCCURRENCE
SPECIES: Betula alleghaniensis
GENERAL DISTRIBUTION :
The range of yellow birch extends from southern Newfoundland, Cape
Breton Island, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Anticosti Island, the Gaspe
peninsula, and Maine west to southern and southwestern Ontario and
Minnesota; south to northern New Jersey, northern Ohio, extreme northern
Indiana and Illinois; and south in the mountains to South Carolina,
extreme northeastern Georgia, and eastern Tennessee [76].
ECOSYSTEMS :
FRES10 White - red - jack pine
FRES11 Spruce - fir
FRES15 Oak - hickory
FRES16 Oak - gum - cypress
FRES17 Elm - ash - cottonwood
FRES18 Maple - beech - birch
STATES :
CT GA IN IL IA KY ME MD MA MI
MN NH NJ NY NC OH PA RI SC TN
VT VA WV WI NB NF NS ON PQ
BLM PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGIONS :
NO-ENTRY
KUCHLER PLANT ASSOCIATIONS :
K093 Great Lakes spruce - fir forest
K096 Northeastern spruce - fir forest
K097 Southeastern spruce - fir forest
K102 Beech - maple forest
K106 Northern hardwoods
K107 Northern hardwoods - fir forest
K108 Northern hardwoods - spruce forest
SAF COVER TYPES :
5 Balsam fir
16 Aspen
17 Pin cherry
18 Paper birch
19 Gray birch - red maple
20 White pine - northern red oak - red maple
21 Eastern white pine
22 White pine - hemlock
23 Eastern hemlock
24 Hemlock - yellow birch
25 Sugar maple - beech - yellow birch
26 Sugar maple - basswood
27 Sugar maple
28 Black cherry - maple
30 Red spruce - yellow birch
31 Red spruce - sugar maple - beech
32 Red spruce
33 Red spruce - balsam fir
34 Red spruce - Fraser fir
35 Paper birch - red spruce - balsam fir
37 Northern white-cedar
39 Black ash - American elm - red maple
50 Black locust
57 Yellow-poplar
58 Yellow-poplar - eastern hemlock
59 Yellow-poplar - white oak - northern red oak
60 Beech - sugar maple
107 White spruce
108 Red maple
SRM (RANGELAND) COVER TYPES :
NO-ENTRY
HABITAT TYPES AND PLANT COMMUNITIES :
Yellow birch is usually found singly or in small groups [32], growing
with American beech (Fagus grandifolia), maples (Acer spp.),
particularly sugar maple (A. saccharum), ashes (Fraxinus spp.), aspens
(Populus spp.), other birches (Betula spp.), eastern white pine (Pinus
strobus), red spruce (Picea rubens), and balsam fir (Abies balsamea)
[25]. In the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence forest region, yellow birch
occurs in mixed forests with red pine (P. resinosa) and eastern white
pine, and with eastern hemlock (Tsuga canadensis) [1]. Yellow birch is
a dominant, codominant, or important species in northern hardwoods-red
spruce forest, northern hardwoods, transition hardwoods-eastern white
pine, and in central hardwoods-eastern hemlock-eastern white pine [28].
Yellow birch is codominant with yellow buckeye (Aesculus octandra) in
western Great Smoky Mountains National Park [19]. In the Catskill
Mountains of New York, yellow birch is dominant in some spruce-fir
stands and codominant in most others. It occurs as nearly pure stands
on steep slopes at higher altitudes, or mixed with black cherry (Prunus
serotina), mountain maple (Acer spicatum), red maple (A. rubrum) and
paper birch (B. papyrifera) in open, scrubby stands on ridgetops [86].
Small trees and shrubs associated with yellow birch include sweet birch
(B. lenta), ironwood (Ostrya virginiana), American hornbeam
(Carpinus caroliniana), striped maple (A. pensylvanicum), mountain
maple, alternate-leaved dogwood (Cornus alternifolia), beaked hazelnut
(Corylus cornuta), Atlantic leatherwood (Dirca palustris), witch-hazel
(Hamamelis virginiana), American fly honeysuckle (Lonicera canadensis),
American mountain-ash (Sorbus americana), Canada elderberry (Sambucus
canadensis), Canada yew (Taxus canadensis), and mapleleaf viburnum
(Viburnum acerifolium) [32].
The largest concentrations of yellow birch are found in Quebec, Ontario, New
Brunswick, Maine, upper Michigan, and New York. About 50 percent of the
growing stock volume of yellow birch is in Quebec [32].
Publications listing yellow birch as a dominant or codominant species in
vegetation classification schemes include:
The natural forests of Maryland: an explanation of the vegetation map of
Maryland [15]
Field guide: Habitat classification system for Upper Peninsula of
Michigan and northeast Wisconsin [24]
White Mountain landscapes [36]
A forest classification for the Maritime Provinces [79]
A classification of the deciduous forest of eastern North America [88]
Vegetation-environment relations in virgin, middle elevation forests
in the Adirondack Mountains, New York [101]
Vegetation of the Great Smoky Mountains [123]
Classification of forest ecosystems in Michigan [126]
MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS
SPECIES: Betula alleghaniensis
WOOD PRODUCTS VALUE :
Yellow birch is an economically important source of lumber. The wood is
heavy, strong, and close-grained. It is used for furniture, cabinetry,
charcoal, pulp [14], interior finish, veneer, tool handles [29], boxes,
woodenware, and interior doors [32].
IMPORTANCE TO LIVESTOCK AND WILDLIFE :
Yellow birch is browsed by moose, white-tailed deer, and snowshoe hare.
Deer consume large numbers of seedlings in summer, and prefer green
leaves and woody stems in fall [32,104]. Yellow birch seeds are
consumed by common redpoll, pine siskin, chickadees, and other songbirds
[104]. Ruffed grouse feed on seeds, catkins, and buds. Red squirrel
cut and store mature strobili, eat yellow birch seeds, and also feed on
birch sap. The yellow-bellied sapsucker uses yellow birch as a summer
food source [32,104]. Beaver and porcupine chew the bark of yellow
birch [104].
PALATABILITY :
Yellow birch was listed as a highly preferred browse species in northern
hardwood forests [110]. In New Hampshire, white-tailed deer browsed
birch twigs (both yellow birch and paper birch) at a browse index rate
of approximately 4 (i.e., four times the expected rate based on
availability) [104].
NUTRITIONAL VALUE :
NO-ENTRY
COVER VALUE :
NO-ENTRY
VALUE FOR REHABILITATION OF DISTURBED SITES :
Early colonizers of a site denuded of vegetation by brine (used for
well-injection fluid) included yellow birch. Soil salinity levels had
returned to slightly above normal when initial colonization occurred [7].
OTHER USES AND VALUES :
Yellow birch can be tapped for sap which is used to make an edible
syrup. Tea can be made from the twigs and/or inner bark [31].
Yellow birch chips can be used to produce ethanol and other products [13].
OTHER MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS :
Numerous management guidelines for yellow birch and yellow
birch-containing types [43,46,73,111], and recommendations for
silvicultural treatments [68,98,113,114] are available in the
literature. Shaw [104] reported on management considerations for
wildlife in northern hardwoods.
Harvest System and Regeneration: Yellow birch regenerates primarily by
germination; very little advance regeneration is usually present
[38,60]. Early twentieth century logging practices that favored shade
tolerant species resulted in a decrease in yellow birch [84]. The
effects of different harvesting systems and conditions on yellow birch
regeneration have been studied and reviewed [70,92,109]. Harvest should
coincide with good seed years [99]. Clearcutting small patches or
strips provides suitable conditions for yellow birch seedling
establishment in the Northeast [32,38,74,82,84]. Yellow birch
reproduces well on patch cuttings of up to 0.3 acre (0.12 ha) [43]. In
New Hampshire, strip cutting failed to increase the proportion of yellow
birch in the stand but it did increase the percentage of yellow birch
likely to become crop trees [47]. Group selection can significantly
increase the proportion of yellow birch by creating openings for yellow
birch regeneration [27,83]. In New Hampshire, after 38 years of group
selection yellow birch comprised one-quarter to one-third of the trees
in the 4- to 12-inch d.b.h. class. The pretreatment proportion was not
reported; however, under single-tree selection yellow birch will usually
decline to less than 20 percent, and sometimes to less than 10 percent,
of stocking [27,72]. In the Great Lakes States, 20 years after group
selection yellow birch had not increased in proportion to other species
[34]. Shelterwood systems designed to increase the proportion of yellow
birch have been investigated [46,49,64,115].
Seedbed Preparation: Scarification of seedbeds improves yellow birch
seedling establishment [38], although the effects may be short-lived if
organic matter is scraped away rather than mixed in with the mineral
soil [64]. Yellow birch can be direct seeded after harvest in the
northern hardwood forest zone [45].
Harvesting Considerations: Yellow birch is windfirm on deep,
well-drained loam and sandy loam soils, but is subject to windthrow on
shallow, poorly drained soils. It is susceptible to winter sunscald
[32]. Yellow birch is sensitive to high soil temperatures and sudden
exposure [43]. It is also susceptible to root, stem, and crown injury
due to logging and is subject to insect attack as a consequence of
injury. Top dieback and some mortality occur after heavy cuts in mature
and overmature stands [32].
Damaging Agents: Yellow birch is susceptible to ice and snow load
damage, and young trees are vulnerable to late spring frosts. Yellow
birch is susceptible to injury at 3.5 ppm sulfur dioxide but is tolerant
of ozone at 0.25 ppm [32]. Hacker and Renfro [48] rated yellow birch as
slightly sensitive to ozone. Top dieback sometimes occurs following
heavy seed crops [32]. Heavy or repeated browsing by deer and moose
kills small yellow birch. Sometimes browsing prevents regeneration
[62]. In New York, growth of yellow birch was not detected on
postharvest plots that were unfenced [11]. Porcupine feeding damages
birch crowns, reduces wood quality, and is sometimes fatal. Red
squirrel cut new germinants [32]. Heavy feeding by yellow-bellied
sapsucker reduces growth, lowers wood quality, and is sometimes fatal
[32]. Yellow birch has relatively few species-specific insect pests,
but is frequently attacked by pests typically associated with other
northern hardwood species [5]. Insect and disease damaging agents are
listed [32].
BOTANICAL AND ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS
SPECIES: Betula alleghaniensis
GENERAL BOTANICAL CHARACTERISTICS :
Yellow birch is a native, deciduous tree. It usually ranges from 60 to
75 feet (18-23 m) in height and up to 2 feet (0.6 m) in diameter, and
occasionally grows to 100 feet (30 m) in height and 4 feet (1.2 m) in
diameter [14,44,53]. Open-grown yellow birch crowns are long and wide
spreading; in more dense forest crowns are short and irregularly rounded
[53]. The trunk usually divides into a few spreading branches but
lateral shade produces a straight trunk that extends nearly to the top
of the tree. In dense stands the trunk is free of branches for over
half the height of the tree [53]. The bark is somewhat lustrous,
separating in thin layers [14] which exfoliate and result in a finely
shaggy appearance [44]. On old trunks, the bark is deeply grooved and
about 0.5-inch (1.2-cm) thick [25]. The root system of yellow birch is
generally shallow but variable. There is a well-developed extensive
lateral root system; roots spread horizontally or may penetrate more
than 5 feet (1.5 m). Yellow birch is monoecious [32]. The fruit is a
winged nutlet 0.13- to 0.14-inch (3.2-3.5-mm) long (not including
the wings) [14].
Yellow birch is slow growing [32]. Average longevity is approximately
150 years, but maximum longevity is over 300 years [58].
RAUNKIAER LIFE FORM :
Phanerophyte
REGENERATION PROCESSES :
Yellow birch reproduces primarily by seed; seedlings and young saplings
will sprout but sprouts are weak and short lived. Older trees do not
sprout [32,74].
Reproductive Age and Seed Crop Production: Under normal conditions,
yellow birch first reproduces at about 40 years. Optimum seed
production occurs at about 70 years of age. However, seeds have been
produced by 7-year-old open-grown saplings, and heavy seed crops have
been produced by 30- to 40-year-old yellow birch in open-grown positions
or in thinned stands. Yellow birch produces good seed crops at 1- to
4-year intervals, usually with very little seed produced in intervening
years [1,32]. Out of every 10 years, yellow birch averages 1 heavy seed
year, 3.5 medium years, 4.5 light or very light years, and 1 year of
seed failure [82]. The maximum number of successive good crops was 4
years [45]. Yellow birch is a prolific seed producer, and viability is
usually good [32], although seed quality is variable from year to year
[60,82]. Seed longevity up to 8 years has been achieved under
laboratory conditions; under natural conditions viability drops off
rapidly the second year [58,60]. However, Roberts and Dong [99]
reported that a substantial amount of yellow birch regeneration was
derived from 2-year-old seed.
Seed Dispersal: Yellow birch seed is disseminated by wind, most of the
seed falling after cold weather begins. The winged nutlets may travel
up to 1,320 feet (400 m) over crusted snow [32]. Effective dispersal is
approximately 2 to 4 times tree height [74]. Korstian [65] estimated
that if yellow birch seeds are released from 50 feet (15 m),
in a 5 mile per hour wind, 50 percent will fall within 700 feet (213 m)
of the release point, and 90 percent within 820 feet (250 m).
Seed Germination: Yellow birch seeds contain a water-soluble
germination inhibitor. This inhibitor is inactivated by light. Under
artificial conditions, seed dormancy is broken by stratification or by
exposure of imbibed seed to cool-white fluorescent light [32]. Yellow
birch seeds germinate and grow best on moist mineral soil enriched with
humus; bare mineral soil and duff alone are unsuitable substrates
[16,64,82,124]. However, in undisturbed stands, germination of yellow
birch seeds usually occurs on mossy logs, decayed wood, in cracks in
boulders and on windthrown tree hummocks [32,67]. Optimum germination
of yellow birch occurs at 59 to 61 degrees Fahrenheit (15-16 deg C)
[27]. A substrate pH of 2.4 completely inhibited germination, and pH
3.0 partly inhibited germination (50.7 percent) [94,96].
Seedling Establishment and Growth: Yellow birch seedlings require
overhead light, crown expansion space, and plentiful soil moisture and
nutrients to compete with faster growing associates; conditions found in
gaps are conducive to yellow birch seedling establishment [1,32]. Some
shade improves seedling survival [82]. In one study, heavily shaded
(14-25% of full sun) yellow birch seedlings grew taller and had more
leaf area than those in full sun, but unshaded seedlings accumulated
more biomass [127]. Mortality of yellow birch seedlings is usually very
high [121]. In one study, minimum mortality was estimated as 97 percent
14 months after germination. Seedling survival is better on disturbed
microsites; seedlings that germinate on litter are unlikely to survive
[26,40]. Seedlings surviving their first year survive to sapling and
larger stages only where there is sufficient light [121]. Surviving
seedlings in hemlock-northern hardwood forests occur on microhabitats
with slightly lower canopy cover than in the surrounding area, primarily
under coniferous rather than mixed canopies [26]. Growth is better on
humus over sandy loams than on decayed logs, mineral soil, or litter
[124].
Vegetative Reproduction: Greenwood cuttings of yellow birch have been
successfully rooted and overwintered. Propagation by grafting is also
possible [32].
SITE CHARACTERISTICS :
Soils: Yellow birch occurs on moist, well-drained soils of uplands and
mountain ravines [32]. It occurs on various soil types including
glacial tills, outwash sands, lacustrine deposits, shallow loess, and
residual soils derived from sandstone, limestone, igneous, and
metamorphic rock [32]. In the Adirondacks, yellow birch occurs on soils
derived from limestone, gneiss, anorthosite, sandstones, shales, and
conglomerates [67]. The best growth occurs on well-drained fertile
loams and moderately well-drained sandy loams [32]. Even though growth
is poor, yellow birch is often abundant where drainage is restricted.
Yellow birch occurs on muck soils with pH 7.5 to 8.0 [9]. In New York,
yellow birch occurred on wetland soils with soil surface pH ranging from
4.0 to 6.8 [59]. Birches (Betula spp.) are sensitive to soil phosphorus
[90].
Periodic droughts are damaging to yellow birch because of its shallow
roots [55].
Elevation: In the Adirondacks and the Appalachians, yellow birch
reaches its maximum importance in the transition zone between low
elevation deciduous forest and montane spruce-fir forests. In the
Adirondacks, it occurs at elevations ranging from 100 feet (30 m) to
3,413 feet (1040 m), but is uncommon above 3,000 feet (914 m)
[10,39,61,67]. The lower slopes to about 2,310 feet (700 m) are
dominated by sugar maple, American beech, and yellow birch. Between
2,310 feet and 2,970 feet (700-900 m) is a transition zone to spruce and
spruce-fir forests. In the southern Appalachians the highest importance
value for yellow birch occurs at mid- to high-elevations from 2,800 to
3,000 feet (853-914 m) [19,23]. In western Great Smoky Mountains
National Park, yellow birch tends to be more concentrated in protected
coves at lower elevations, and spreads out of the coves at higher
elevations [19].
SUCCESSIONAL STATUS :
Facultative Seral Species
Yellow birch is intermediate in shade tolerance. Leak [71] assigned
yellow birch to the category of persistent successional species. Yellow
birch is described as opportunistic due to its habit of producing
abundant small seed [40]. Yellow birch seeds comprised a higher than
expected proportion (compared to the abundance of mature trees) of the
seed rain and seedbank of a mixed forest [56]. The presence of yellow
birch in mid- to late-successional stands depends on local disturbance
[28,71]; it cannot reproduce under a closed canopy and requires soil
disturbance and light for seedling survival [32]. Birches respond to
gaps of all sizes, with a peak density found in gaps of about 2,800
square feet (250 sq m) in Pennsylvania. In the southern Appalachians,
birches exhibited a peak density in 10-year-old gaps [102]. In southern
Appalachian spruce-fir forests, yellow birch seedlings were the most
abundant species in gap plots but not in closed-canopy plots. They
exhibited the highest growth rate of any species in gaps [122]. The
origin of the gap is apparently important; in upper Michigan, yellow
birch apparently failed to establish readily in gaps formed by stem
breakage because soil was undisturbed [87]. Yellow birch decreased
between 1964 and 1986 in red spruce-Fraser fir (Abies fraseri) stands,
even though there was loss of the Fraser fir to insect attack [18].
Yellow birch seedlings do not successfully compete with advance
regeneration of other northern hardwood species, grasses, and forbs
[32]. However, in sugar maple-beech-yellow birch forests, seedlings of
the three dominants were approximately equally abundant [40]. In mature
hemlock-hardwood forests in New York, yellow birch was the third most
common seedling species, distributed randomly as to canopy type [26].
Yellow birch seedlings tend to occur in clumps. The abundance of yellow
birch seedlings in Quebec was almost always negatively correlated to
that of other tree species even though its seed abundance was positively
related to that of other species [57]. Sugar maple seedlings produce an
allelopathic substance that inhibits the root growth of yellow birch
seedlings [112].
Early Successional Stands: Yellow birch is a common early to
mid-successional associate in aspen-birch stands [28]. In northern
hardwood ecosystems, yellow birch reaches maximum importance levels
within 15 years of disturbance, and those levels are maintained for at
least 100 years [81]. On Isle Royale, Michigan, a paper birch-dominated
stand that originated after fire early in this century is undergoing
canopy invasion by sugar maple and yellow birch [50]. In New Hampshire,
succession was monitored after experimental deforestation and 3 years of
vegetation suppression. Yellow birch comprised 0.6 percent of total
biomass in the first year of succession, and increased to 11.8 percent
in the nineteenth year [97]. Second-growth stands usually contain
approximately the same percentage of yellow birch as virgin stands [32].
Yellow birch occurs on fine till with importance peaking at about 80
years. On sandy soils, the trend is indistinct, probably declining over
time [71]. On old fields in Tennessee, succession included small
amounts of yellow birch in 15-year-old stands. Yellow birch occurred at
maximum density on 42- and 48-year-old plots, was present in lower
numbers on the 63-year-old plot, and was not present in the old-growth
plots [21].
Mid- to Late-Successional Stands: Yellow birch is abundant in mid- to
late-successional balsam fir-yellow birch-paper birch-white spruce
(Picea glauca) stands on Isle Royale [50]. It is a major gap-phase
component of sugar maple-beech-yellow birch and hemlock-yellow birch
cover types [32]. The age distribution of yellow birch in a virgin
northern hardwoods forest was somewhat irregular: There were many
10-year-old saplings, no 40-year-old trees, and many 100-year-old trees
[69]. In Wisconsin, even-aged northern hardwoods contain a high
proportion of yellow birch and uneven-aged stands tend towards pure
sugar maple [80]. In many old-growth stands, yellow birch gradually
decreases in importance as the stand ages. In Tennessee, in both
hemlock-mixed forest and mixed deciduous forest, yellow birch decreased
between 1935 and 1987 in undisturbed stands [17].
Climax Stands: Cary [128] described a climax forest in Maine consisting
of red spruce, American beech, maples, and yellow birch. Hansen and
others [50] described a yellow birch-sugar maple type as the climax
forest on Isle Royale, Michigan. These forests have not experienced
major disturbances for more than 120 years and include yellow birch of
up to 150 years of age [50]. Yellow birch was present in old-growth
forests in New York. The average ages of yellow birch trees in two
stands were 200 and 250 years [75]. Forcier [40] explained the presence
of yellow birch in climax stands as a combination of longevity and
micro-succession. At the single tree level, yellow birch is replaced by
sugar maple which is replaced by beech, which, following a small-scale
disturbance, is replaced by yellow birch [40].
SEASONAL DEVELOPMENT :
The pistillate catkins of yellow birch form in the fall, and finish
development from late May to early June. The fruit ripens from late
August to early September [32]. The phenology of yellow birch in
northern Minnesota was reported as follows [4]:
flower appearance April 2 to May 16
initial bud swell April 6 to May 1
leaf out May 3 to May 25
anthesis May 13 to May 29
seed fall (initiation) August 6
leaf fall September 26 to October 4
FIRE ECOLOGY
SPECIES: Betula alleghaniensis
FIRE ECOLOGY OR ADAPTATIONS :
Yellow birch is susceptible to fire injury due to its thin bark [32];
young yellow birch do not usually survive fire. Mature trees may
survive because the thin forest floor under large yellow birch does not
usually support severe or persistent surface fire [90]. Yellow birch
germinates readily on early postfire sites [91,92,115].
Forest Type: Heinselman [52] suggested that the presence of yellow
birch in old mixed forests is hard explain without fire disturbance;
however, other authors describe yellow birch as opportunistic with
respect to fire but not fire dependent [90]. Lorimer [77,78] reported
that the presence of yellow birch (in land survey records) is not a
reliable indicator of previous fire. In Massachusetts, a beech-hemlock
forest containing yellow birch developed on an island where fire had not
occurred for many years. The land surrounding the island is occupied by
fire-dependent pitch pine (Pinus rigida) and scrub oak types. In the
1940's the island forest was broken up by a hurricane, which corresponds
with the age of many yellow birch [30].
Fire Frequency: Yellow birch typically occurs in forests with fire-free
intervals of at least 150 to 300 years; the fire regime is characterized
by crown and severe surface fires in combination [52]. The
presettlement hemlock-northern hardwood forests experienced fire
infrequently [2]. In Wisconsin, mesic hemlock-northern hardwood forests
north and east of the transition zone between the fire-dependent
prairie-savanna mosaic and nonfire-dependent forest probably experienced
fire periodically prior to the fire-suppression era. The presence of
large, late-successional species indicates that the average interval
between stand-replacing fires was longer than the average lifespan of
major tree species in the region [20]. In the Great Lakes States and
Acadian Forest region, presettlement northern hardwoods-pine-spruce-fir
forests probably had a semieven-aged structure where less shade-tolerant
components were maintained by long-return interval disturbances such as
fire or windstorms. Most fires in these forests were severe surface
fires, occurring only after prolonged drought, and usually affecting
forests that were breaking up due to other factors (and thus had heavy
fuels). Estimates for Maine presettlement fire return intervals range
from 806 to 1,923 years [77].
In the twentieth century, forest types containing yellow birch in New
Brunswick have either experienced no fires or have had very long
fire-free intervals. For sugar maple-yellow birch-fir in New Brunswick,
the mean annual area burned between 1931 and 1970 was about 0.16 percent
of the total area of that type [119]. A similar study for Nova Scotia
reported that 0.03 percent of the total area (of sugar maple-yellow
birch-fir) burned annually between 1915 and 1975 [120]. In northern
Maine, hardwood forests were estimated to have a fire return interval of
approximately 800 years [2]. Northern hardwood forests had estimated
fire return intervals (from data spanning 1903-1956) of 910 years for
Maine and 770 years for New Hampshire [35].
Fire Season and Conditions: At low elevations in the southern
Appalachians, lightning-caused fires occur less often in the hardwood
forests than in pine-hardwood forests. Fire frequency by forest type is
related to the month of occurrence. Fires that occur before May usually
start at higher elevations; after May, more fires start at lower
elevations and are concentrated in the pine-hardwood type, possibly
because after hardwoods have leafed out fuel moistures are too high to
support fire [8]. In Maine, northern hardwoods are less likely to burn
than other forest types, and are more susceptible to fire damage.
Ignition and spread of fire are unlikely except during the most severe
droughts [89].
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".
POSTFIRE REGENERATION STRATEGY :
Tree without adventitious-bud root crown
Initial-offsite colonizer (off-site, initial community)
FIRE EFFECTS
SPECIES: Betula alleghaniensis
IMMEDIATE FIRE EFFECT ON PLANT :
Yellow birch seedlings and saplings are killed by even low-severity
fires [32]. Small trees were killed by fire that left large trees in a
northern hardwoods forest unharmed [105]. Large trees usually survive
fire; Martin [85] mentioned the presence of large, old yellow birch that
predate a fire that initiated a red maple-paper birch stand in Ontario.
A subjective ranking of tree fire resistance compiled by Starker [106]
listed yellow birch as twelfth out of twenty-two species rated.
DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF FIRE EFFECT :
NO-ENTRY
PLANT RESPONSE TO FIRE :
Yellow birch is a poor sprouter following top-kill by fire. Seed
germination and seedling establishment are enhanced by fire disturbance.
Yellow birch frequently forms pure patches following fire. In Wisconsin
northern hardwood forests it often comprises 60 percent of the hardwood
thickets [80]. Most of the research on yellow birch regeneration is
associated with logging regimes, so it is not clear what role fire plays
in yellow birch regeneration in unmanaged stands. It is likely that a
low-intensity, patchy fire would create conditions that favor yellow
birch regeneration by reducing the hardwood leaf mat and exposing
mineral soil, but leaving mature trees as a seed source [1].
In northern hardwood forests, postfire regeneration is likely to include
at least a small proportion of yellow birch. Major postfire species in
this area are paper birch, gray birch (Betula populifolia), aspens, red
spruce, and pines (Pinus spp.) [32,89]. In the Laurentian Highlands of
central Quebec, yellow birch is present in low numbers in early postfire
succession on well-drained sites in montane mixed forests. The main
colonizers are balsam fir and paper birch [22]. In North Carolina
spruce-fir forests, which rarely burn, yellow birch was important in
postfire regeneration [103]. Gibson [42] reported that former Atlantic
white-cedar (Chamaecyparis thyoides) swamps developed into red maple or
red maple-yellow birch stands following fire. In northwestern
Pennsylvania, a ridge that supported a dense stand of eastern hemlock
and mixed hardwoods was converted by fire to a stand composed of red
maple, black cherry, yellow birch, and water birch (B. occidentalis) [54].
In northern hardwood types in Wisconsin, low-severity surface fires seem
to favor sugar maple over yellow birch and beech. Severe fires,
however, destroy existing sugar maple reproduction and create openings
in the canopy, favoring yellow birch. The composition of a northern
hardwood stand was traced to three distinct fires, each of which was
followed by an increase in the proportion of yellow birch [80]. Birches
(yellow birch, sweet birch, and paper birch) exhibited a pulse of
reproduction after a surface fire in Connecticut, peaking in density
around 25 years. By 55 years after the fire birch density on burned and
unburned stands was similarly low [117].
DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF PLANT RESPONSE :
NO-ENTRY
FIRE MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS :
Regression coefficients relating bark thickness to diameter at breast height
have been published for yellow birch [51].
The moisture content of the inner bark of yellow birch ranges from 44 to
65 percent, depending on season of sampling. The heat of combustion
of dry yellow birch bark is 9,200 Btu [129].
Site Preparation: Fire has been used to create suitable seedbed
conditions for yellow birch regeneration [1]. In New York, the number
of yellow birch seedlings was higher on postharvest plots that had been
prescribed burned and scarified than on plots that had either been
prescribed burned or scarified, or on control plots [11]. Prescribed
fires have been used for yellow birch seedbed preparation in Ontario.
The fires were conducted in late fall, after sugar maple and beech leaf
and seedfall and before the major portion of yellow birch seeds were
dispersed. Low-intensity surface fires consumed litter and killed
advance regeneration of sugar maple. These fires did not significantly
reduce the number of stems (all species) greater than 0.6 inch (1.5 cm)
d.b.h., though basal scarring was evident. Fire-prepared plots resulted
in higher stocking of yellow birch than unburned plots, and reduced the
development of sugar maple [6,16].
REFERENCES
SPECIES: Betula alleghaniensis
REFERENCES :
1. A. D. Revill Associates. 1978. Ecological eff. of fire and its mgmt. in
Canada's national parks: a synthesis of the literature. Vols 1&2. Lit.
Rev. & Annot. Bibliography. Ottawa, ON: Parks Canada, National Parks
Branch, Natural Resources Division. 345 p. [3416]
2. Abrams, Marc D. 1992. Fire and the development of oak forests.
BioScience. 42(5): 346-353. [19215]
3. Adams, Harold S.; Stephenson, Steven L. 1989. Old-growth red spruce
communities in the mid-Appalachians. Vegetatio. 85: 45-56. [11409]
4. Ahlgren, C. E. 1957. Phenological observations of nineteen native tree
species in northeastern Minnesota. Ecology. 38(4): 622-628. [74]
5. Allen, Douglas C. 1987. Insects, declines and general health of northern
hardwoods: issues relevant to good forest management. In: Nyland, Ralph
D., editor. Managing northern hardwoods: Proceedings of a silvicultural
symposium; 1986 June 23-25; Syracuse, NY. Faculty of Forestry
Miscellaneous Publication No. 13 (ESF 87-002); Society of American
Foresters Publication No. 87-03. Syracuse, NY: State University of New
York, College of Environmental Science and Forestry: 252-285. [10659]
6. Anderson, H. W. 1982. Regenerating yellow birch with prescribed fire.
In: Proceedings, Society of American Foresters national convention; 1982
September 19-22; Cincinnati, OH. Bethesda, MD: Society of American
Foresters: 168-172. [6715]
7. Auchmoody, L. R.; Walters, R. S. 1988. Revegetation of a brine-killed
forest site. Soil Science Society of America Journal. 52: 277-280.
[11374]
8. Barden, Lawrence S.; Woods, Frank W. 1974. Characteristics of lightning
fires in southern Appalachian forests. In: Proceedings, annual Tall
Timbers fire ecology conference; 1973 March 22-23; Tallahassee, FL. No.
13. Tallahassee, FL: Tall Timbers Research Station: 345-361. [19012]
9. Barnes, Burton V. 1976. Succession in deciduous swamp communities of
southeastern Michigan formerly dominated by American elm. Canadian
Journal of Botany. 54: 19-24. [4914]
10. Battles, John J.; Johnson, Arthur H.; Siccama, Thomas G.; [and others].
1992. Red spruce death: effects on forest composition and structure on
Whiteface Mountain, New York. Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club.
119(4): 418-430. [21119]
11. Behrend, Donald F.; Patric, Earl F. 1969. Influence of site disturbance
and removal of shade on regeneration of deer browse. Journal of Wildlife
Management. 33(2): 394-398. [15619]
12. Bormann, F. H.; Buell, M. F. 1964. Old-age stand of hemlock-northern
hardwood forest in central Vermont. Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical
Club. 91(6): 451-465. [8856]
13. Brink, D. L.; Merriman, M. M.; Gullekson, E. E. 1987. Ethanol fuel,
organic chemicals, single-cell proteins: a new forest products industry.
In: Plumb, Timothy R.; Pillsbury, Norman H., technical coordinators.
Proceedings of the symposium on multiple-use management of California's
hardwood resources; 1986 November 12-14; San Luis Obispo, CA. Gen. Tech.
Rep. PSW-100. Berkeley, CA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service, Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station: 237-243.
[5379]
14. Brown, Russell G.; Brown, Melvin L. 1972. Woody plants of Maryland.
Baltimore, MD: Port City Press. 347 p. [21844]
15. Brush, Grace S.; Lenk, Cecilia; Smith, Joanne. 1980. The natural forests
of Maryland: an explanation of the vegetation map of Maryland.
Ecological Monographs. 50(1): 77-92. [19035]
16. Burton, D. H.; Anderson, H. W.; Riley, L. F. 1969. Natural regeneration
of yellow birch in Canada. In: The birch symposium: Proceedings; 1969
August 19-21; Durham, NH. Upper Darby, PA: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station:
55-73. [21870]
17. Busing, Richard T. 1989. A half century of change in a Great Smoky
Mountains cove forest. Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club. 116(3):
283-288. [10901]
18. Busing, Richard T.; Clebsch, Edward E. C.; Eagar, Christopher C.;
Pauley, Eric F. 1988. Two decades of change in a Great Smoky Mountains
spruce-fir forest. Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club. 115(1): 25-31.
[4491]
19. Callaway, Ragan M.; Clebsch, Edward E. C.; White, Peter S. 1987. A
multivariate analysis of forest communities in the western Great Smoky
Mountains National Park. American Midland Naturalist. 118(1): 107-120.
[15604]
20. Canham, Charles D.; Loucks, Orie L. 1984. Catastrophic windthrow in the
presettlement forests of Wisconsin. Ecology. 65(3): 803-809. [13438]
21. Clebsch, Edward E. C.; Busing, Richard T. 1989. Secondary succession,
gap dynamics, and community structure in a southern Appalachian cove
forest. Ecology. 70(3): 728-735. [6972]
22. Cogbill, Charles V. 1985. Dynamics of the boreal forests of the
Laurentian Highlands, Canada. Canadian Journal of Forest Research. 15:
252-261. [19928]
23. Cogbill, C. V.; White, P. S. 1991. The latitude-elevation relationship
for spruce-fir forest and treeline along the Appalachian mountain chain.
Vegetatio. 94(2): 153-175. [16806]
24. Coffman, Michael S.; Alyanak, Edward; Resovsky, Richard. 1980. Field
guide habitat classification system: For Upper Peninsula of Michigan and
northeast Wisconsin. [Place of publication unknown]: Cooperative
Research on Forest Soils. 112 p. [8997]
25. Collingwood, G. H.; Brush, Warren D.; [revised and edited by Butcher,
Devereux]. 1964. Knowing your trees. 2nd ed. Washington, DC: The
American Forestry Association. 349 p. [22497]
26. Collins, Scott L. 1990. Habitat relationships and survivorship of tree
seedlings in hemlock-hardwood forest. Canadian Journal of Botany. 68:
790-797. [11368]
27. Crow, Thomas R.; Metzger, Fredrick T. 1987. Regeneration under selection
cutting. In: Nyland, Ralph D., editor. Managing northern hardwoods:
Proceedings of a silvicultural symposium; 1986 June 23-25; Syracuse, NY.
Faculty of Forestry Miscellaneous Publication No. 13 (ESF 87-002);
Society of American Foresters Publication No. 87-03. Syracuse, NY: State
University of New York, College of Environmental Science and Forestry:
81-94. [10651]
28. DeGraaf, Richard M.; Yamasaki, Mariko; Leak, William B.; Lanier, John W.
1992. New England wildlife: management of forested habitats. Gen. Tech.
Rep. NE-144. Radnor, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,
Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. 271 p. [19322]
29. Duncan, Wilbur H.; Duncan, Marion B. 1988. Trees of the southeastern
United States. Athens, GA: The University of Georgia Press. 322 p.
[12764]
30. Dunwiddie, Peter W. 1991. Forest history and composition of Halfway Pond
Island, Plymouth County, Massachusetts. Rhodora. 93(876): 347-360.
[17362]
31. Elias, Thomas S.; Dykeman, Peter A. 1982. Field guide to North American
edible wild plants. [Place of publication unknown]: Outdoor Life Books.
286 p. [21103]
32. Erdmann, G. G. 1990. Betula alleghaniensis Britton yellow birch. In:
Burns, Russell M.; Honkala, Barbara H., technical coordinators. Silvics
of North America. Volume 2. Hardwoods. Agric. Handb. 654. Washington,
DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service: 133-147. [21816]
33. Eyre, F. H., ed. 1980. Forest cover types of the United States and
Canada. Washington, DC: Society of American Foresters. 148 p. [905]
34. Eyre, F. H.; Zillgitt, W. M. 1953. Partial cuttings in northern
hardwoods of the Lake States: twenty-year experimental results. Tech.
Bull. No. 1076. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture. 124 p.
[23839]
35. Fahey, Timothy J.; Reiners, William A. 1981. Fire in the forests of
Maine and New Hampshire. Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club. 108:
362-373. [9707]
36. Fay, Stephen C.; Alvis, Richard. 1993. White Mountain landscapes.
Laconia, NH: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Region 9,
White Mountain National Forest. 76 p. Working draft. [21663]
37. Fernald, Merritt Lyndon. 1950. Gray's manual of botany. [Corrections
supplied by R. C. Rollins]. Portland, OR: Dioscorides Press. 1632 p.
(Dudley, Theodore R., gen. ed.; Biosystematics, Floristic & Phylogeny
Series; vol. 2). [14935]
38. Filip, Stanley M. 1969. Natural regeneration of birch in New England.
In: The birch symposium: Proceedings; 1969 August 19-21; Durham, NH.
Forest Service Research Paper NE-146. Upper Darby, PA: U.S. Department
of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station:
50-54. [15350]
39. Fitzgerald, Brian T.; Raynal, Dudley J. 1991. Population dynamics and
growth of balsam fir on Whiteface Mountain, New York. Bulletin of the
Torrey Botanical Club. 118(3): 255-264. [16764]
40. Forcier, Lawrence K. 1975. Reproductive strategies and the co-occurrence
of climax tree species. Science. 198: 808-810. [11371]
41. Garrison, George A.; Bjugstad, Ardell J.; Duncan, Don A.; [and others].
1977. Vegetation and environmental features of forest and range
ecosystems. Agric. Handb. 475. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service. 68 p. [998]
42. Gibson, J. Miles. 1938. Comments (on article: Fire in modern forest
management by Haig, I. T.). Journal of Forestry. 36: 1049-1051. [18566]
43. Gilbert, Adrian M.; Jensen, Victor S. 1958. A management guide for
northern hardwoods in New England. Station Paper No. 112. Upper Darby,
PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest
Experiment Station, 22 p. [10982]
44. Gleason, Henry A.; Cronquist, Arthur. 1991. Manual of vascular plants of
northeastern United States and adjacent Canada. 2nd ed. New York: New
York Botanical Garden. 910 p. [20329]
45. Godman, Richard M.; Mattson, Gilbert A. 1976. Seed crops and
regeneration problems of 19 species in northeastern Wisconsin. Res. Pap.
NC-123. St. Paul, MN: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,
North Central Forest Experiment Station. 5 p. [3715]
46. Godman, Richard M.; Tubbs, Carl H. 1973. Establishing even-age northern
hardwood regeneration by the shelterwood method--a preliminary guide.
Res. Pap. NC-99. St. Paul, MI: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service, North Central Forest Experiment Station. 9 p. [11372]
47. Gove, Jeffrey H.; Martin, C. Wayne; Patil, Gianapati P.; [and others].
1992. Plant species diversity on even-aged harvests at the Hubbard Brook
Experimental Forest: 10-year results. Canadian Journal of Forest
Research. 22: 1800-1806. [20103]
48. Hacker, David; Renfro, James. 1992. Great Smoky Mountain plants studied
for ozone sensitivity. Park Science. 12(1): 6-7. [17788]
49. Hannah, Peter R. 1991. Regeneration of northern hardwoods in the
Northeast with the shelterwood method. Northern Journal of Applied
Forestry. 8(3): 99-104. [5351]
50. Hansen, H. L.; Krefting, L. W.; Kurmis, V. 1973. The forest of Isle
Royale in relation to fire history and wildlife. Tech. Bull. 294;
Forestry Series 13. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota,
Agricultural Experiment Station. 44 p. [8120]
51. Harmon, Mark E. 1984. Survival of trees after low-intensity surface
fires in Great Smoky Mountains National Park. Ecology. 65(3): 796-802.
[10997]
52. Heinselman, Miron L. 1981. Fire intensity and frequency as factors in
the distribution and structure of northern ecosystems. In: Mooney, H.
A.; Bonnicksen, T. M.; Christensen, N. L.; [and others], technical
coordinators. Fire regimes and ecosystem properties: Proceedings of the
conference; 1978 December 11-15; Honolulu, HI. Gen. Tech. Rep. WO-26.
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service: 7-57.
[4390]
53. Hosie, R. C. 1969. Native trees of Canada. 7th ed. Ottawa, ON: Canadian
Forestry Service, Department of Fisheries and Forestry. 380 p. [3375]
54. Hough, A. F. 1936. A climax forest community on East Tionesta Creek in
northwestern Pennsylvania. Ecology. 17(1): 9-28. [3460]
55. Hough, A. F.; Forbes, R. D. 1943. The ecology and silvics of forests in
the high plateaus of Pennsylvania. Ecological Monographs. 13(3):
299-320. [8723]
56. Houle, Gilles. 1991. Regenerative traits of tree species in a deciduous
forest of northeastern North America. Holarctic Ecology. 14(2): 142-151.
[14474]
57. Houle, Gilles. 1992. Spatial relationship between seed and seedling
abundance and mortality in a deciduous forest of north-eastern North
America. Journal of Ecology. 80: 99-108. [18756]
58. Houle, Gilles; Payette, Serge. 1990. Seed dynamics of Betula
alleghaniensis in a deciduous forest of northeastern North America.
Journal of Ecology. 78: 677-690. [13325]
59. Huenneke, Laura Foster. 1982. Wetland forests of Tompkins County, New
York. Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club. 109(1): 51-63. [22960]
60. Hughes, Jeffrey W.; Fahey, Timothy J. 1988. Seed dispersal and
colonization in a disturbed northern hardwood forest. Bulletin of the
Torrey Botanical Club. 115(2): 89-99. [10894]
61. Johnson, Arthur H.; McLaughlin, Samuel B. 1986. The nature and timing of
the deterioration of red spruce in the northern Appalachian Mountains.
In: Acid deposition: long term trends. [Place of publication unknown]:
National Academy Press: 200-230. [20000]
62. Jordan, James S.; Rushmore, Francis M. 1969. Animal damage to birch. In:
The birch symposium: Proceedings; 1969 August 19-21; Durham, NH. Res.
Pap. NE-146. Upper Darby, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station: 155-163. [15354]
63. Kartesz, John T.; Kartesz, Rosemarie. 1980. A synonymized checklist of
the vascular flora of the United States, Canada, and Greenland. Volume
II: The biota of North America. Chapel Hill, NC: The University of North
Carolina Press; in confederation with Anne H. Lindsey and C. Richie
Bell, North Carolina Botanical Garden. 500 p. [6954]
64. Kelty, Matthew J. 1987. Shelterwood cutting as an even-aged reproduction
method. In: Nyland, Ralph D., editor. Managing northern hardwoods:
Proceedings of a silvicultural symposium; 1986 June 23-25; Syracuse, NY.
Faculty of Forestry Miscellaneous Publication No. 13 (ESF 87-002);
Society of American Foresters Publication No. 87-03. Syracuse, NY: State
University of New York, College of Environmental Science and Forestry:
128-142. [10653]
65. Korstian, Clarence F. 1937. Perpetuation of spruce on cut-over and
burned lands in the higher Southern Appalachian Mountains. Ecological
Monographs. 7(1): 125-167. [11233]
66. Kuchler, A. W. 1964. Manual to accompany the map of potential vegetation
of the conterminous United States. Special Publication No. 36. New York:
American Geographical Society. 77 p. [1384]
67. Kudish, Michael. 1992. Adirondack upland flora: an ecological
perspective. Saranac, NY: The Chauncy Press. 320 p. [19376]
68. Lamson, Neil I.; Smith, H. Clay. 1987. Precommercial treatments of 15-
to 40-year old northern hardwood stands. In: Nyland, Ralph D., editor.
Managing northern hardwoods: Proceedings of a silvicultural symposium;
1986 June 23-25; Syracuse, NY. Faculty of Forestry Miscellaneous
Publication No. 13 (ESF 87-002); Society of American Foresters
Publication No. 87-03. Syracuse, NY: State University of New York,
College of Environmental Science and Forestry: 160-175. [10655]
69. Leak, W. B. 1975. Age distribution in virgin red spruce and northern
hardwoods. Ecology. 56: 1451-1454. [8690]
70. Leak, William B. 1988. Effects of weed species on northern hardwood
regeneration in New Hampshire. Northern Journal of Applied Forestry. 5:
235-237. [10889]
71. Leak, William B. 1991. Secondary forest succession in New Hampshire,
USA. Forest Ecology and Management. 43: 69-86. [16683]
72. Leak, W. B.; Filip, L. M. 1977. Thirty-eight years of group selection in
New England northern hardwoods. Journal of Forestry. 75: 641-643.
[23838]
73. Leak, William B.; Solomon, Dale S.; Filip, Stanley M. 1969. A
silvicultural guide for northern hardwoods in the northeast. Res. Pap.
NE-143. Upper Darby, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,
Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. 34 p. [10976]
74. Lees, John C. 1987. Clearcutting as an even-aged reproduction method.
In: Nyland, Ralph D., editor. Managing northern hardwoods: Proceedings
of a silvicultural symposium; 1986 June 23-25; Syracuse, NY. Faculty of
Forestry Miscellaneous Publication No. 13 (ESF 87-002); Society of
American Foresters Publication No. 87-03. Syracuse, NY: State University
of New York, College of Environmental Science and Forestry: 115-127.
[10652]
75. Leopold, Donald J.; Reschke, Carol; Smith, Daniel S. 1988. Old-growth
forests of Adirondack Park, New York. Natural Areas Journal. 8(3):
166-189. [13998]
76. Little, Elbert L., Jr. 1979. Checklist of United States trees (native
and naturalized). Agric. Handb. 541. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service. 375 p. [2952]
77. Lorimer, Craig G. 1977. The presettlement forest and natural disturbance
cycle of northeastern Maine. Ecology. 58: 139-148. [9711]
78. Lorimer, Craig G. 1980. The use of land survey records in estimating
presettlement fire frequency. In: Stokes, Marvin A.; Dieterich, John H.,
technical coordinators. Proceedings of the fire history workshop; 1980
October 20-24; Tucson, AZ. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-81. Fort Collins, CO: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and
Range Experiment Station: 57-62. [16043]
79. Loucks, O. L. 1959. A forest classification for the Maritime Provinces.
Proceedings, Nova Scotian Institute on Science. 25: 86-167. [15408]
80. Maissurow, D. K. 1941. The role of fire in the perpetuation of virgin
forests of northern Wisconsin. Journal of Forestry. 39(2): 201-207.
[3445]
81. Marks, P. L. 1974. The role of pin cherry (Prunus pensylvanica L.) in
the maintenance of stability in northern hardwood ecosystems. Ecological
Monographs. 44: 73-88. [4144]
82. Marquis, David A. 1969. Silvical requirements for natural birch
regeneration. In: The birch symposium: Proceedings; 1969 August 19-21;
Durham, NH. Res. Pap. NE-146. Upper Darby, PA: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station:
40-49. [15116]
83. Marquis, David A.; Johnson, Robert L. 1989. Silviculture of eastern
hardwoods. In: Burns, Russell M., compiler. The scientific basis for
silvicultural and management decisions in the National Forest System.
Gen. Tech. Rep. WO-55. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Forest Service: 9-15. [10242]
84. Martin, C. Wayne; Hornbeck, James W. 1990. Regeneration after strip
cutting and block clearcutting in northern hardwoods. Northern Journal
of Applied Forestry. 7: 65-68. [11784]
85. Martin, N. D. 1959. An anaylsis of forest succession in Algonquin Park,
Ontario. Ecological Monographs. 29(3): 187-218. [19930]
86. McIntosh, R. P.; Hurley, R. T. 1964. The spruce-fir forest of the
Catskill Mountains. Ecology. 45(2): 314-326. [14886]
87. Mladenoff, David J. 1990. The relationship of the soil seed bank and
understory vegetation in old-growth northern hardwood-hemlock treefall
gaps. Canadian Journal of Botany. 68: 2714-2721. [13477]
88. Monk, Carl D.; Imm, Donald W.; Potter, Robert L.; Parker, Geoffrey G.
1989. A classification of the deciduous forest of eastern North America.
Vegetatio. 80: 167-181. [9297]
89. Patterson, William A., III; Saunders, Karen E.; Horton, L. J. 1983. Fire
regimes of the coastal Maine forests of Acadia National Park. OSS 83-3.
Boston, MA: U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service,
North Atlantic Region, Office of Scientific Studies. 259 p. In
cooperation with: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, State
and Private Forestry, Broomall, PA. [21108]
90. Perala, Donald Albert. 1987. Regenerating the birches: ecology and
cultural requirements. St. Paul, MI: University of Minnesota. 215 p.
Thesis. [12115]
91. Perala, Donald A.; Alm, Alvin A. 1990. Reproductive ecology of birch: a
review. Forest Ecology and Management. 32: 1-38. [12210]
92. Perala, Donald A.; Alm, Alvin A. 1990. Regeneration silviculture of
birch: a review. Forest Ecology and Management. 32: 37-77. [12211]
93. Radford, Albert E.; Ahles, Harry E.; Bell, C. Ritchie. 1968. Manual of
the vascular flora of the Carolinas. Chapel Hill, NC: The University of
North Carolina Press. 1183 p. [7606]
94. Raunkiaer, C. 1934. The life forms of plants and statistical plant
geography. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 632 p. [2843]
95. Raynal, D. J.; Roman, J. R.; Eichenlaub, W. M. 1982. Response of tree
seedlings to acid precipitation. II. Effect of simulated acidified
canopy throughfall on sugar maple seedling growth. Environmental and
Experimental Botany. 22(3): 385-392. [24047]
96. Raynal, D. J.; Roman, J. R.; Eichenlaub, W. M. 1982. Response of tree
seedlings to acid precipitation. I. Effect of substrate acidity on seed
germination. Environmental and Experimental Botany. 22(3): 377-383.
[12531]
97. Reiners, William A. 1992. Twenty years of ecosystem reorganization
following experimental deforestation and regrowth suppression.
Ecological Monographs. 62(4): 503-523. [19822]
98. Roberge, Marcien R. 1988. Effects of thinning, patch clearcutting, site
preparation, and planting on development of yellow birch in Quebec.
Northern Journal of Applied Forestry. 5: 248-251. [10890]
99. Roberts, Mark R.; Dong, Hongyun. 1991. Eff. of forest floor disturb. on
soil seed banks, germ. & early survival after clearcutting a northern
hardwood stand in central New Brunswick. In: Simpson, C. M., ed.
Proceedings of the conference on natural regeneration management; 1990
March 27-28; Fredericton, NB. Fredericton, NB: Forestry Canada,
Maritimes Region: 67-84. [17191]
100. Rogers, R. S. 1978. Forests dominated by hemlock (Tsuga canadensis):
distribution as related to site and postsettlement history. Canadian
Journal of Botany. 56: 843-854. [20408]
101. Roman, John Ross. 1980. Vegetation-environment relationships in virgin,
middle elevation forests in the Adirondack Mountains, New York.
Syracuse, NY: State University of New York. PhD. Dissertation.
Dissertation Abstracts International. 41(3): 807-B. [21154]
102. Runkle, James Reade. 1982. Patterns of disturbance in some old-growth
mesic forests of eastern North American. Ecology. 63(5): 1533-1546.
[9261]
103. Saunders, Paul R.; Smathers, Garrett A.; Ramseur, George S. 1983.
Secondary succession of a spruce-fir burn in the Plott Balsam Mountains,
North Carolina. Castanea. 48(1): 41-47. [8658]
104. Shaw, Samuel P. 1969. Management of birch for wildlife habitat. In: The
birch symposium: Proceedings; 1969 August 19-21; Durham, NH. Res. Pap.
NE-146. Upper Darby, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,
Northeastern Forest Experiment Station: 181-183. [15355]
105. Sinclair, G. A. 1962. Progress report of prescribed burning in hardwood
stands. Section Report (Forestry) No. 45. Ottawa, ON: Ontario Department
of Lands and Forests, Research Branch. 18 p. [25275]
106. Starker, T. J. 1932. Fire resistance of trees of northeast United
States. Forest Worker. 8(3): 8-9. [81]
107. Stickney, Peter F. 1989. Seral origin of species originating in northern
Rocky Mountain forests. Unpublished draft on file at: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, Fire
Sciences Laboratory, Missoula, MT; RWU 4403 files. 7 p. [20090]
108. Thom, G. 1988. High-yield pulps from Canadian hardwoods. In: Samoil, J.
K., ed. Management and utilization of northern mixedwoods: Proceedings
of a symposium; 1988 April 11-14; Edmonton, AB. Inf. Rep. NOR-X-296.
Edmonton, AB: Canadian Forestry Service, Northern Forestry Centre:
119-128. [13052]
109. Thurston, Sally W.; Krasny, Marianne E.; Martin, C. Wayne; Fahey,
Timothy J. 1992. Effect of site characteristics and 1st- and 2nd-year
seedling densities on forest development in a northern hardwood forest.
Canadian Journal of Forest Research. 22: 1860-1868. [20431]
110. Tilghman, Nancy G. 1989. Impacts of white-tailed deer on forest
regeneration in northwestern Pennsylvania. Journal of Wildlife
Management. 53(3): 524-532. [8914]
111. Trimble, George R., Jr.; Patric, James H.; Gill, John D.; [and others].
1974. Some options for managing forest land in the central Appalachians.
Gen. Tech. Rep. NE-12. Upper Darby, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. 42 p. [13545]
112. Tubbs, Carl H. 1973. Allelopathic relationship between yellow birch and
sugar maple seedlings. Forest Science. 19(2): 139-145. [6970]
113. Tubbs, Carl H. 1977. Manager's handbook for northern hardwoods in the
north central states. Gen. Tech. Rep. NC-39. St, Paul MI: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, North central Forest
Experiment Station. 29 p. [10974]
114. Tubbs, Carl H. 1977. Age and structure of a northern hardwood selection
forest, 1929-1976. Journal of Forestry. 75: 22-24. [19707]
115. Tubbs, Carl H. 1978. Stand composition in relation to uneven-aged
silviculture. In: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Timber
Management Research, compiler. Uneven-aged silviculture and management
in the United States: Proceedings; 1975 July 15-17; 1976 October 19-21;
Redding, CA. Gen. Tech. Rep. WO-24. Washington, DC: 88-103. [7318]
116. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1994. Plants
of the U.S.--alphabetical listing. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 954 p. [23104]
117. Ward, Jeffrey S.; Stephens, George R. 1989. Long-term effects of a 1932
surface fire on stand structure in a Connecticut mixed hardwood forest.
In: Rink, George; Budelsky, Carl A., eds. Proceedings, 7th central
hardwood conference; 1989 March 5-8; Carbondale, IL. Gen. Tech. Rep.
NC-132. St. Paul, MN: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,
North Central Forest Experiment Station: 267-273. [9389]
118. Wein, Ross W.; El-Bayoumi, M. A.; da Silva, J. 1989. Simulated
predictions of forest dynamics in Fundy National Park, Canada. Forest
Ecology and Management. 28: 47-60. [10919]
119. Wein, Ross W.; Moore, Janice M. 1977. Fire history and rotations in the
New Brunswick Acadian Forest. Canadian Journal of Forest Research. 7:
285-294. [17716]
120. Wein, Ross W.; Moore, Janice M. 1979. Fire history and recent fire
rotation periods in the Nova Scotia Acadian Forest. Canadian Journal of
Forest Research. 9: 166-178. [9705]
121. White, Peter S. 1979. Pattern, process, and natural disturbance in
vegetation. Botanical Review. 45(3): 229-299. [7869]
122. White, Peter S.; MacKenzie, Mark D.; Busing, Richard T. 1985. Natural
disturbance and gap phase dynamics in southern Appalachian spruce-fir
forests. Canadian Journal of Forest Research. 15: 233-240. [9294]
123. Whittaker, R. H. 1956. Vegetation of the Great Smoky Mountains.
Ecological Monographs. 26(1): 1-79. [11108]
124. Winget, C. H.; Cottam, G.; Kozlowski, T. T. 1965. Species association
and stand structure of yellow birch in Wisconsin. Forest Science. 11(3):
369-383. [21189]
125. Winget, C. H.; Kozlowski, T. T. 1965. Yellow birch germination and
seedling growth. Forest Science. 11(4): 386-392. [22154]
126. Pregitzer, Kurt S.; Ramm, Carl W. 1984. Classification of forest
ecosystems in Michigan. In: Bockheim, James G., ed. Forest land
classification: experiences, problems, perspectives: Proceedings of a
symposium; 1984 March 18-20; Madison, WI. Madison, WI: University of
Wisconsin, Department of Soil Science: 114-131. [12779]
127. Gordon, Robert B. 1969. The natural vegetation of Ohio in pioneer days.
Bulletin of the Ohio Biological Survey. New Series Vol. 3: No. 2.
Columbus, Ohio: The Ohio State University. 113 p. [21105]
128. Carey, Andrew B. 1983. Cavities in trees in hardwood forests. In: Davis,
Jerry W.; Goodwin, Gregory A.; Ockenfeis, Richard A., technical
coordinators. Snag habitat management: proceedings of the symposium;
1983 June 7-9; Flagstaff, AZ. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-99. Fort Collins, CO:
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest
and Range Experiment Station: 167-184. [17833]
129. Spalt, Karl W.; Reifsnyder, William E. 1962. Bark characteristics and
fire resistance: a literature survey. Occas. Paper 193. New Orleans, LA:
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Forest
Experiment Station. 19 p. In cooperation with: Yale University, School
of Forestry. [266]
130. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Biological Survey. [n.d.]. NP
Flora [Data base]. Davis, CA: U.S. Department of the Interior, National
Biological Survey. [23119]
131. Higginbotham, Jeri Welsh; Curtis, Marilou; Parks, Clifford R. 1989.
Morphological variation in southern Appalachian Betula alleghaniensis
and B. lenta (Betulaceae). Rhodora. 91(866): 172-187. [22995]
FEIS Home Page
https://www.fs.usda.gov/database/feis/plants/tree/betall/all.html
