Index of Species Information

SPECIES:  Pinus radiata

Introductory

SPECIES: Pinus radiata
AUTHORSHIP AND CITATION : Cope, Amy B. 1993. Pinus radiata. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/ []. ABBREVIATION : PINRAD SYNONYMS : Pinus insignis Dougl. ex Loud. Pinus muricata D. Don var. cedrosensis Howell SCS PLANT CODE : PIRA2 COMMON NAMES : Monterey pine insignis pine radiata pine Cambria pine Guadalupe Island pine Cedros Island pine TAXONOMY : The currently accepted scientific name of Monterey pine is Pinus radiata D. Don [12,31,32,33,43]. There are three recognized varieties [10,38]: Pinus radiata var. radiata Pinus radiata var. binata Lemmon Pinus radiata var. cedrosensis (Howell) Axelrod. Monterey pine hybridizes with knobcone pine (Pinus attenuata) and bishop pine (Pinus muricata) [12,32,25]. LIFE FORM : Tree FEDERAL LEGAL STATUS : None OTHER STATUS : Information on state- and province-level protection status of plants in the United States and Canada is available at NatureServe.


DISTRIBUTION AND OCCURRENCE

SPECIES: Pinus radiata
GENERAL DISTRIBUTION : The typical variety of Monterey pine occurs along the coast of California in three disjunct populations in San Mateo and Santa Cruz counties, Monterey County, and San Luis Obispo County. Pinus radiata var. binata occurs on Guadalupe Island, Mexico [12,32,33,35,42]. Pinus radiata var. cedrosensis is found on Cedros Island, Mexico [10,12,38]. Monterey pine is cultivated for timber in Maui, Hawaii [33]. It is also widely planted for timber in Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, Chile, Spain, and the British Isles [33,35,41,46,51]. ECOSYSTEMS : FRES28 Western hardwoods FRES34 Chaparral - mountain shrub STATES : CA HI MEXICO BLM PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGIONS : 3 Southern Pacific Border KUCHLER PLANT ASSOCIATIONS : K009 Pine - cypress forest K030 California oakwoods SAF COVER TYPES : 255 California coast live oak SRM (RANGELAND) COVER TYPES : NO-ENTRY HABITAT TYPES AND PLANT COMMUNITIES : Monterey pine is part of the coastal closed-cone coniferous woodland [23]. It is named as a dominant canopy member in the following publications: Terrestrial natural communities of California [23] A vegetation classification system applied to southern California [44] Vascular plant communities of California [50] The closed cone pines and cypress [52] Associated trees not mentioned in distribution and occurrence are Gowen cypress (Cupressus goveniana var. goveniana), Monterey cypress (C. macrocarpa), Santa Cruz cypress (C. goveniana var. abramsiana), Tecate cypress (C. guadalupensis var. forbesii), bishop pine (Pinus muricata), and Pacific madrone (Arbutus mensiesii) [23,36,50,52]. Understory associates include woolyleaf manzanita (Arctostaphylos tomentosa), California huckleberry (Vaccinium ovatum), poison-oak (Toxicodendron diversiloba), El Dorado bedstraw (Galium californicum), thingrass (Agrostis diegoensis), and blue wildrye (Elymus glaucus) [23,52].

MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS

SPECIES: Pinus radiata
WOOD PRODUCTS VALUE : Monterey pine wood is light, soft, and coarse grained [35,43]. It is of little commercial value in the United States except as fuelwood [35]. In other parts of the world it is used for general construction, flooring, furniture, joinery, plywood, reconstituted panel products, and paper. When treated with preservatives it cab be used for siding, decking, external trim, poles, piles, fencing, and railroad ties [4]. IMPORTANCE TO LIVESTOCK AND WILDLIFE : Goats, black-tailed deer, and porcupine browse Monterey pine. Porcupine also eat the bark [27,30,35]. Birds and small mammals consume the seeds [35]. PALATABILITY : NO-ENTRY NUTRITIONAL VALUE : NO-ENTRY COVER VALUE : NO-ENTRY VALUE FOR REHABILITATION OF DISTURBED SITES : Monterey pine is planted for erosion control [35]. Ease of establishment and a widespreading root system make it a good species for stabilizing soils on steep slopes [28]. OTHER USES AND VALUES : Monterey pine is valued for shade and as an ornamental [33,35]. It provides a barrier to wind and noise [35,53]. It is also used for Christmas trees [35]. OTHER MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS : Cone processing and nursery practices are discussed in the literature [11,25]. Monterey pine is affected by many pests such as western dwarf mistletoe, western gall rust, various needle blights, and moths [2,35,44]. Monterey pine is moderately windfirm on deep soils [35]. Goats have nearly eradicated all natural regeneration of Montery pine on Gudalupe Island [27,35]. Much of the Monterey pine planted as ornamentals comes from New Zealand stock. This stock originated from native California populations several generations ago. In Cambria and Monterey, California, this imported stock is crossbreeding with native individuals. The genetic effects of this crossbreeding on native trees is unknown, and preserving genotypes of native individuals is a point of management concern [39]. Monterey pine is the subject of a genetic conservation program [27].

BOTANICAL AND ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS

SPECIES: Pinus radiata
GENERAL BOTANICAL CHARACTERISTICS : Monterey pine is a native, evergreen conifer. It attains a height of 49.5 to 115.5 feet (15-35 m) and a d.b.h. of 24 to 36 inches (60-90 cm) [43]. The outer bark is narrowly ridged and the inner bark is resinous [33,43]. The needles occur in clusters of three and are 4 to 6 inches (10-15 cm) long. They persist for approximately 3 years [11,33,43]. Cones are 3 to 5.5 inches (7.5-14 cm) long and occur in one or more clusters of three to five around the branch [16,33,43,54]. Monterey pine lives a maximum of 80 to 90 years [49]. Monterey pine has a low frost tolerance [35]. RAUNKIAER LIFE FORM : Phanerophyte REGENERATION PROCESSES : The minimum seed-bearing age for Monterey pine is between 5 and 10 years. Maximum seed production beings at 15 or 20 years of age if trees are open-grown, and later if stands are dense [11,25,35]. Cones are produced annually, with good cone crops produced every other year [25]. Mature cones remain attached to the branch. They may remain closed for several years, depending upon temperature and humidity. Cones open and release seed during warm, dry periods and close rapidly when temperature drops and relative humidity increases. This results in a constant but meager seed rain [52]. The cones of native populations open infrequently because their habitat is typically cool and moist. Seedfall is heaviest in warm, dry years [35]. Unreleased seed remains viable for decades. Seeds from cones up to 24 years of age have germinated; however, germinative capacity appears to fall off with progressing years [52]. Seeds can be exposed to a temperature of 203 degrees Fahrenheit (95 deg C) before germination is significantly reduced [29]. Seedling recruitment is best on mineral soil [52]. Details of growth are discussed in the literature [11]. Monterey pine does not reproduce by sprouting [14,35]. SITE CHARACTERISTICS : The climate where Monterey pine occurs is humid with mild year-round temperatures. Winters are wet. Rain does not usually fall in July and August, but tree crowns collect moisture from summer fog moving inland [35]. On Guadalupe and Cedros islands the climate is mediterranean [23,35]. Soils in which Monterey pine grows are often deep, sandy loams with a clay layer 20 to 33 inches (50-80 cm) below the surface. Good sites have a top layer of organic soil. Soils are generally acidic [35]. Slopes are typically gentle and often north facing [35]. SUCCESSIONAL STATUS : Facultative Seral Species Monterey pine normally invades dry sites with poor, shallow soils. It also invades oldfields after land clearance, grazing, fire, or logging [48]. Trees establish in even-aged stands [52]. Monterey pine has intermediate shade tolerance [6,35]. As it matures it becomes even less tolerant of shade, and shows optimal growth in full sunlight [5]. SEASONAL DEVELOPMENT : Pollination occurs from January to February but may be extended due to high temperatures [15,25,35]. Cones open and seeds are dispersed in the first warm, moist days of late winter and early spring. Cones may open and close several times as moisture and temperature conditions fluctuate [35].

FIRE ECOLOGY

SPECIES: Pinus radiata
FIRE ECOLOGY OR ADAPTATIONS : Monterey pine cones are serotinous; seeds are released when cones are exposed to heat such as fire or high air temperature [19,31,37,53]. Fire is particularly effective for opening cones and releasing seeds. It also creates a favorable seedbed. Reproduction rates are greatest after surface fire in which the parent trees survive [52]. The foliage of Monterey pine is low in volatile terpenes [10]. POSTFIRE REGENERATION STRATEGY : Tree without adventitious-bud root crown Crown residual colonizer (on-site, initial community)

FIRE EFFECTS

SPECIES: Pinus radiata
IMMEDIATE FIRE EFFECT ON PLANT : Monterey pine is killed by severe surface or crown fire. Trees survive crown scorch unless it is extensive. In South Africa Monterey pine survived a surface wildfire except where crown scorch was greater than 90 percent [13,14]. Trees are damaged by direct heat. Exposure to a temperature of 424 degrees Fahrenheit (200 deg C) for more than half a minute resulted in cambium death wherever heat was applied [13,52]. Such localized burning or scorching of bark of mature trees causes scarring but may not result in tree death [52]. Young, thin-barked Monterey pine are often killed by fire, particularly when stands are dense and crown fire occurs [52]. DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF FIRE EFFECT : NO-ENTRY PLANT RESPONSE TO FIRE : Monterey pine cones open and release seed after fire [19]. In California, White [in 52] reported a seedling density of 196 per acre (490/ha) the January following a spring wildfire. Seedlings were 12 to 22.4 inches (30-56 cm) tall. DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF PLANT RESPONSE : NO-ENTRY FIRE MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS : Thinning and pruning in Monterey pine plantations result in accumulation of flammable fuels [8]. Crown scorch and cambium damage are reduced when slash is mechanically reduced before burning [8].

REFERENCES

SPECIES: Pinus radiata
REFERENCES : 1. Adams, Ronald S. 1974. When it pays to shade planted tree seedlings. State Forest Notes No. 55. Sacramento, CA: State of California, The Resources Agency, Department of Conservation, Division of Forestry. 6 p. [7936] 2. Ades, P. K.; Simpson, J. A.; Eldridge, K. G.; Eldridge, R. H. 1992. Genetic variation in susceptibility to Dothistroma needle blight among provenance and families of Pinus muricata. Canadian Journal of Forest Research. 22: 1111-1117. [20210] 3. Alban, David H.; Perala, Donald A.; Schlaegel, Bryce E. 1978. Biomass and nutrient distribution in aspen, pine, and spruce stands on the same soil type in Minnesota. Canadian Journal of Forest Research. 8: 290-299. [16911] 4. Alexiou, P. N.; Gardner, W. D.; Lind, P.; Butler D. 1986. Efficacy of an amino resin fire retardant. Forest Products Journal. 36(11/1): 9-15. [18516] 5. Baker, Frederick S. 1945. Effects of shade on coniferous seedlings grown in nutrient solutions. Journal of Forestry. 43: 428-435. [9935] 6. Baker, Frederick S. 1949. A revised tolerance table. Journal of Forestry. 47: 179-181. [20404] 7. Bernard, Stephen R.; Brown, Kenneth F. 1977. Distribution of mammals, reptiles, and amphibians by BLM physiographic regions and A.W. Kuchler's associations for the eleven western states. Tech. Note 301. Denver, CO: U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management. 169 p. [434] 8. Burrows, N. D. 1980. Crushing the thinning slash problem. Research Paper 62. Perth, Australia: Forests Department of Western Australia. 4 p. [17004] 9. Clinnick, P. F.; Willatt, S. T. 1981. Soil physical and chemical properties measured in an "ashbed" following windrow burning. Australian Forestry. 44(3): 185-189. [19644] 10. Cool, Laurence G.; Zavarin, Eugene. 1992. Terpene variability of mainland Pinus radiata. Biochemical Systematics and Ecology. 20(2): 133-144. [19639] 11. Cremer, K. W. 1992. Relations between reproductive growth and vegetative growth of Pinus radiata. Forest Ecology and Management. 52: 179-199. [19651] 12. Critchfield, William B.; Little, Elbert L., Jr. 1966. Geographic distribution of the pines of the world. Misc. Publ. 991. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 97 p. [20314] 13. de Ronde, C. 1982. The resistance of Pinus species to fire damage. South African Forestry Journal. 122: 22-27. [9916] 14. DeRonde, Neels. 1990. How to minimize losses after wildfire by the application of damage evaluation techniques in pine stands. In: International Conference of Forest Fire Research; 1990 November 19 - November 22; Coimbra, Portugal. Coimbra, Portugal: International Conference on Forest Fire Research: B.22 - 1-9. [17888] 15. Duffield, J. W. 1953. Pine pollen collection dates--annual and geographic variation. For. Res. Notes No. 85. Berkeley, CA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, California Forest and Range Experiment Station. 9 p. [17970] 16. Evarts, Bill. 1986. Torrey pines: resurrection or remission. Environment Southwest. 514: 3-8. [5602] 17. Eyre, F. H., ed. 1980. Forest cover types of the United States and Canada. Washington, DC: Society of American Foresters. 148 p. [905] 18. Fennell, Norman H.; Hutnik, Russell J. 1970. Ecological effects of forest fires. Unpublished paper on file at: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory, Missoula, MT. 84 p. [16873] 19. Fiske, John N.; DeBell, Dean S. 1989. Silviculture of Pacific coast forests. 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: 59-78. [10246] 20. Frampton, L. John, Jr.; Hodges, James F. 1989. Nursery rooting of cuttings from seedlings of slash and loblolly pine. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry. 13(3): 127-132. [9038] 21. 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] 22. Gill, A. Malcolm. 1979. Fire in the Australian landscape. Landscape Planning. 6: 343-357. [19646] 23. Holland, Robert F. 1986. Preliminary descriptions of the terrestrial natural communities of California. Sacramento, CA: California Department of Fish and Game. 156 p. [12756] 24. Kayll, A. J. 1974. Use of fire in land management. In: Kozlowski, T. T.; Ahlgren, C. E., eds. Fire and ecosystems. New York: Academic Press: 483-511. [6870] 25. Kalmbacher, R. S.; Martin, F. G.; Terry, W. S.; [and others]. 1985. Effects of clipping on burned and unburned creeping bluestem. Journal of Range Management. 38(6): 531-535. [1308] 26. 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] 27. Libby, W. J. 1990. Genetic conservation of radiata pine and coast redwood. Forest Ecology and Management. 35: 109-120. [12099] 28. Libby, William J.; Rodrigues, Kimberly A. 1992. Revegetating the 1991 Oakland-Berkeley Hills burn. Fremontia. 20(1): 12-18. [19086] 29. Linhart, Yan B. 1978. Maintenance of variation in cone morphology in California closed-cone pines: the roles of fire, squirrels, and seed output. Southwestern Naturalist. 23(1): 29-40. [19166] 30. Linhart, Yan B.; Snyder, Marc A.; Habeck, Susan A. 1989. The influence of animals on genetic variability within ponderosa pine stands, illustrated by the effects of Abert's squirrel and porcupine. In: Tecle, Aregai; Covington, W. Wallace; Hamre, R. H., technical coordinators. Multiresource management of ponderosa pine forests: Proceedings of the symposium; 1989 November 14-16; Flagstaff, AZ. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-185. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station: 141-148. [11312] 31. Little, Elbert L., Jr. 1975. Rare and local conifers in the United States. Conservation Research Rep. No. 19. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 25 p. [15691] 32. 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] 33. Little, Elbert L., Jr.; Skomen, Roger G. 1989. Common forest trees of Hawaii (native and introduced). Agric. Handb. 679. Washington, DC: U.S Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 321 p. [9433] 34. McCune, Bruce. 1988. Ecological diversity in North American pines. American Journal of Botany. 75(3): 353-368. [5651] 35. McDonald, Philip M.; Laacke, Robert J. 1990. Pinus radiata D. Don Monterey pine. In: Burns, Russell M.; Honkala, Barbara H., technical coordinators. Silvics of North America. Volume 1. Conifers. Agric. Handb. 654. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service: 433-441. [13401] 36. McMillan, Calvin. 1956. The edaphic restriction of Cupressus and Pinus in the Coast Ranges of central California. Ecological Monographs. 26: 177-212. [11884] 37. Menke, John W.; Villasenor, Ricardo. 1977. The California Mediterranean ecosystem and its management. In: Mooney, Harold A.; Conrad, C. Eugene, technical coordinators. Proc. of the symp. on the environmental consequences of fire and fuel management in Mediterranean ecosystems; 1977 August 1-5; Palo Alto, CA. Gen. Tech. Rep. WO-3. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service: 257-270. [4847] 38. Millar, Constance I. 1986. The Californian closed cone pines (subsection Oocarpae Little and Critchfield): a taxonomic history and review. Taxon. 35(4): 657-670. [5972] 39. Millar, Constance I.; Libby, William J. 1989. Disneyland or native ecosystem: genetics and the restorationist. Restoration and Management Notes. 7(1): 18-24. [8071] 40. Molina, Randy; Amaranthus, Michael. 1991. Rizosphere biology: ecological linkages between soil processes, plant growth, and community dynamics. In: Harvey, Alan E.; Neuenschwander, Leon F., compilers. Proceedings--management and productivity of western-montane forest soils; 1990 April 10-12; Boise, ID. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-280. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station: 51-58. [15968] 41. Mitchell, Alan F. 1972. Conifers in the British Isles: A descriptive handbook. Forestry Commission Booklet No. 33. London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office. 322 p. [20571] 42. Mulroy, Thomas W. 1990. Facilitating the use of indigenous genotypes in natural area revegtation projects. In: Hughes, H. Glenn; Bonnicksen, Thomas M., eds. Restoration '89: the new management challenge: Proceedings, 1st annual meeting of the Society for Ecological Restoration; 1989 January 16-20; Oakland, CA. Madison, WI: The University of Wisconsin Arboretum, Society for Ecological Restoration: 205-214. [14696] 43. Munz, Philip A. 1973. A California flora and supplement. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. 1905 p. [6155] 44. Nowak, David J.; McBride, Joe R. 1992. Differences in Monterey pine pest populations in urban and natural forests. Forest Ecology and Management. 50: 133-144. [19640] 45. Paysen, Timothy E.; Derby, Jeanine A.; Black, Hugh, Jr.; [and others]. 1980. A vegetation classification system applied to southern California. Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-45. Berkeley, CA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. 33 p. [1849] 46. Raison, R. J.; Myers, B. J. 1992. The biology of forest growth experiment: linking water and nitrogen availability to the growth of Pinus radiata. Forest Ecology and Management. 52: 279-308. [19650] 47. Raunkiaer, C. 1934. The life forms of plants and statistical plant geography. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 632 p. [2843] 48. Richardson, David M.; Bond, William J. 1991. Determinants of plant distribution: evidence from pine invasions. American Naturalist. 137(5): 639-668. [15377] 49. 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] 50. Lesperance, A. L.; Young, James A.; Eckert, Richard E., Jr.; Evans, Raymond A. 1978. Great Basin wildrye. Rangeman's Journal. 5(4): 125-127. [3829] 51. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1982. National list of scientific plant names. Vol. 1. List of plant names. SCS-TP-159. Washington, DC. 416 p. [11573] 52. Vogl, Richard J.; Armstrong, Wayne P.; White, Keith L.; Cole, Kenneth L. 1977. The closed-cone pines and cypress. In: Barbour, Michael G.; Major, Jack, eds. Terrestrial vegetation of California. New York: John Wiley and Sons: 295-358. [7219] 53. Warren, Richard; Fordham, Alfred J. 1978. The fire pines. Arnoldia. 38(1): 1-11. [18709] 54. Zedler, Paul H. 1986. Closed-cone conifers of the chaparral. Fremontia. 14(3): 14-17. [18648]


FEIS Home Page