4.4 Article

BIOMASS AND BURNING CHARACTERISTICS OF SUGAR PINE CONES

Journal

FIRE ECOLOGY
Volume 8, Issue 3, Pages 58-70

Publisher

SPRINGEROPEN
DOI: 10.4996/fireecology.0803058

Keywords

fuel loading; mixed-conifer; Pinus lambertiana; Sierra Nevada; surface fuel; Yosemite National Park

Funding

  1. College of Forestry and Conservation Irene Evers' Undergraduate Research Scholarship
  2. University of Montana Davidson Honors College Undergraduate Research Award

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We investigated the physical and burning characteristics of sugar pine (Pinus lambertiana Douglas) cones and their contribution to woody surface fuel loadings. Field sampling was conducted at the Yosemite Forest Dynamics Plot (YFDP), a 25.6 ha mapped study plot in Yosemite National Park, California, USA. We developed a classification system to describe sugar pine cones of different sizes and decay conditions, and examined differences among cone classes in biomass, bulk density, flame length, burning time, consumption, and relative contribution to surface fuel loads. Sugar pine cones comprised 601 kg ha(-1) of surface fuels. Mature cones comprised 54 % of cone biomass, and aborted juvenile cones accounted for 44 %. Cone biomass, diameter, and bulk density differed among cone condition classes, as did burning characteristics (one-way ANOVA, P < 0.001 in all cases). Flame lengths ranged from 5 cm to 94 cm for juvenile cones, and 71 cm to 150 cm for mature cones. Our results showed that the developmental stage at which sugar pine cones become surface fuels determines their potential contribution to surface fire behavior in Sierra Nevada mixed-conifer forests. Sugar pine cones burn with greater flame lengths and flame times than the cones of other North American fire-tolerant pine species studied to date, indicating that cones augment the surface fire regime of sugar pine forests, and likely do so to a greater degree than do cones of other pine species.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available