Forest Fertilizer Applications in the Southeastern United States from 1969 to 2016
Abstract This study presents forest fertilization and carbon sequestered from fertilization in the southeastern United States in the context of newly available silviculture management information. Maximum annual fertilized forest area in the southeastern United States occurred in 1999 when 1.58 mill...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Forest science 2019-05, Vol.65 (3), p.355-362 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 362 |
---|---|
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | 355 |
container_title | Forest science |
container_volume | 65 |
creator | Albaugh, Timothy J Fox, Thomas R Cook, Rachel L Raymond, Jay E Rubilar, Rafael A Campoe, Otávio C |
description | Abstract
This study presents forest fertilization and carbon sequestered from fertilization in the southeastern United States in the context of newly available silviculture management information. Maximum annual fertilized forest area in the southeastern United States occurred in 1999 when 1.58 million acres were fertilized. Since then, the fertilized area has generally declined, and in 2016, 589,000 acres were fertilized. This decline is likely related to new research and changes in economic conditions. Recent research has determined that lower, more frequent nutrient doses gave the same biological response as larger, less frequent doses; improved our understanding and use of urease inhibitors; and quantified the upper limit to pine productivity in the southeast United States. All of these factors combined with economic concerns including the continued low number of housing starts, a large inventory of stands with trees that are already sawtimber size, and low sawtimber prices influence forest managers’ decisions about fertilization. However, fertilization increases carbon sequestration in forests, and carbon markets that recognize this contribution to sequestration are developing and may provide additional income to forest managers and, ultimately, increase the area fertilized. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1093/forsci/fxy058 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2246695399</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><oup_id>10.1093/forsci/fxy058</oup_id><sourcerecordid>2246695399</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c337t-8cfde69374195e173ae1e62edc093cf3e7897b6f36b20cf87c638d2c1d20a0e53</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkEtLAzEYRYMoWKtL9wE3bsbm0cljWYpVQRCsBXchzXzBlHYyJhmw_npHxr2ruzncyz0IXVNyR4nmMx9TdmHmv46kVidoQjVXFZdcnaIJIbSu5Fy_n6OLnHeEEMUJm6DXVUyQC15BKmEfviHhRdftg7MlxDbj0OLyAXgd-yFsLpBavGlDgQaviy2QsU_xgKkWGpeIGaHiEp15u89w9ZdTtFndvy0fq-eXh6fl4rlynMtSKecbEJrLOdU1UMktUBAMGjd8cZ6DVFpuhediy4jzSjrBVcMcbRixBGo-RTdjb5fiZz-cMLvYp3aYNIzNhdA113qgqpFyKeacwJsuhYNNR0OJ-dVmRm1m1DbwtyMf--4f9AePWW_F</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2246695399</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Forest Fertilizer Applications in the Southeastern United States from 1969 to 2016</title><source>Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current)</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><creator>Albaugh, Timothy J ; Fox, Thomas R ; Cook, Rachel L ; Raymond, Jay E ; Rubilar, Rafael A ; Campoe, Otávio C</creator><creatorcontrib>Albaugh, Timothy J ; Fox, Thomas R ; Cook, Rachel L ; Raymond, Jay E ; Rubilar, Rafael A ; Campoe, Otávio C</creatorcontrib><description>Abstract
This study presents forest fertilization and carbon sequestered from fertilization in the southeastern United States in the context of newly available silviculture management information. Maximum annual fertilized forest area in the southeastern United States occurred in 1999 when 1.58 million acres were fertilized. Since then, the fertilized area has generally declined, and in 2016, 589,000 acres were fertilized. This decline is likely related to new research and changes in economic conditions. Recent research has determined that lower, more frequent nutrient doses gave the same biological response as larger, less frequent doses; improved our understanding and use of urease inhibitors; and quantified the upper limit to pine productivity in the southeast United States. All of these factors combined with economic concerns including the continued low number of housing starts, a large inventory of stands with trees that are already sawtimber size, and low sawtimber prices influence forest managers’ decisions about fertilization. However, fertilization increases carbon sequestration in forests, and carbon markets that recognize this contribution to sequestration are developing and may provide additional income to forest managers and, ultimately, increase the area fertilized.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0015-749X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1938-3738</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1093/forsci/fxy058</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>US: Oxford University Press</publisher><subject>Age ; Agricultural production ; Carbon ; Carbon sequestration ; Census of Population ; Economic conditions ; Economics ; Fertilization ; Fertilizer application ; Fertilizers ; Forest management ; Forestry ; Greenhouse gases ; Housing starts ; Information management ; Inventory ; Nitrogen ; Phosphorus ; Plantations ; Productivity ; Silviculture ; Urease</subject><ispartof>Forest science, 2019-05, Vol.65 (3), p.355-362</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2018 Society of American Foresters 2018</rights><rights>Copyright Society of American Foresters Jun 2019</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c337t-8cfde69374195e173ae1e62edc093cf3e7897b6f36b20cf87c638d2c1d20a0e53</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c337t-8cfde69374195e173ae1e62edc093cf3e7897b6f36b20cf87c638d2c1d20a0e53</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-9810-8834 ; 0000-0002-4929-7613</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1584,27924,27925</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Albaugh, Timothy J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fox, Thomas R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cook, Rachel L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Raymond, Jay E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rubilar, Rafael A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Campoe, Otávio C</creatorcontrib><title>Forest Fertilizer Applications in the Southeastern United States from 1969 to 2016</title><title>Forest science</title><description>Abstract
This study presents forest fertilization and carbon sequestered from fertilization in the southeastern United States in the context of newly available silviculture management information. Maximum annual fertilized forest area in the southeastern United States occurred in 1999 when 1.58 million acres were fertilized. Since then, the fertilized area has generally declined, and in 2016, 589,000 acres were fertilized. This decline is likely related to new research and changes in economic conditions. Recent research has determined that lower, more frequent nutrient doses gave the same biological response as larger, less frequent doses; improved our understanding and use of urease inhibitors; and quantified the upper limit to pine productivity in the southeast United States. All of these factors combined with economic concerns including the continued low number of housing starts, a large inventory of stands with trees that are already sawtimber size, and low sawtimber prices influence forest managers’ decisions about fertilization. However, fertilization increases carbon sequestration in forests, and carbon markets that recognize this contribution to sequestration are developing and may provide additional income to forest managers and, ultimately, increase the area fertilized.</description><subject>Age</subject><subject>Agricultural production</subject><subject>Carbon</subject><subject>Carbon sequestration</subject><subject>Census of Population</subject><subject>Economic conditions</subject><subject>Economics</subject><subject>Fertilization</subject><subject>Fertilizer application</subject><subject>Fertilizers</subject><subject>Forest management</subject><subject>Forestry</subject><subject>Greenhouse gases</subject><subject>Housing starts</subject><subject>Information management</subject><subject>Inventory</subject><subject>Nitrogen</subject><subject>Phosphorus</subject><subject>Plantations</subject><subject>Productivity</subject><subject>Silviculture</subject><subject>Urease</subject><issn>0015-749X</issn><issn>1938-3738</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkEtLAzEYRYMoWKtL9wE3bsbm0cljWYpVQRCsBXchzXzBlHYyJhmw_npHxr2ruzncyz0IXVNyR4nmMx9TdmHmv46kVidoQjVXFZdcnaIJIbSu5Fy_n6OLnHeEEMUJm6DXVUyQC15BKmEfviHhRdftg7MlxDbj0OLyAXgd-yFsLpBavGlDgQaviy2QsU_xgKkWGpeIGaHiEp15u89w9ZdTtFndvy0fq-eXh6fl4rlynMtSKecbEJrLOdU1UMktUBAMGjd8cZ6DVFpuhediy4jzSjrBVcMcbRixBGo-RTdjb5fiZz-cMLvYp3aYNIzNhdA113qgqpFyKeacwJsuhYNNR0OJ-dVmRm1m1DbwtyMf--4f9AePWW_F</recordid><startdate>20190521</startdate><enddate>20190521</enddate><creator>Albaugh, Timothy J</creator><creator>Fox, Thomas R</creator><creator>Cook, Rachel L</creator><creator>Raymond, Jay E</creator><creator>Rubilar, Rafael A</creator><creator>Campoe, Otávio C</creator><general>Oxford University Press</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8AF</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>BKSAR</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PCBAR</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>S0X</scope><scope>SOI</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9810-8834</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4929-7613</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20190521</creationdate><title>Forest Fertilizer Applications in the Southeastern United States from 1969 to 2016</title><author>Albaugh, Timothy J ; Fox, Thomas R ; Cook, Rachel L ; Raymond, Jay E ; Rubilar, Rafael A ; Campoe, Otávio C</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c337t-8cfde69374195e173ae1e62edc093cf3e7897b6f36b20cf87c638d2c1d20a0e53</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>Age</topic><topic>Agricultural production</topic><topic>Carbon</topic><topic>Carbon sequestration</topic><topic>Census of Population</topic><topic>Economic conditions</topic><topic>Economics</topic><topic>Fertilization</topic><topic>Fertilizer application</topic><topic>Fertilizers</topic><topic>Forest management</topic><topic>Forestry</topic><topic>Greenhouse gases</topic><topic>Housing starts</topic><topic>Information management</topic><topic>Inventory</topic><topic>Nitrogen</topic><topic>Phosphorus</topic><topic>Plantations</topic><topic>Productivity</topic><topic>Silviculture</topic><topic>Urease</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Albaugh, Timothy J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fox, Thomas R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cook, Rachel L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Raymond, Jay E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rubilar, Rafael A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Campoe, Otávio C</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>STEM Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Materials Science & Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>eLibrary</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric & Aquatic Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric & Aquatic Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Forest science</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Albaugh, Timothy J</au><au>Fox, Thomas R</au><au>Cook, Rachel L</au><au>Raymond, Jay E</au><au>Rubilar, Rafael A</au><au>Campoe, Otávio C</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Forest Fertilizer Applications in the Southeastern United States from 1969 to 2016</atitle><jtitle>Forest science</jtitle><date>2019-05-21</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>65</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>355</spage><epage>362</epage><pages>355-362</pages><issn>0015-749X</issn><eissn>1938-3738</eissn><abstract>Abstract
This study presents forest fertilization and carbon sequestered from fertilization in the southeastern United States in the context of newly available silviculture management information. Maximum annual fertilized forest area in the southeastern United States occurred in 1999 when 1.58 million acres were fertilized. Since then, the fertilized area has generally declined, and in 2016, 589,000 acres were fertilized. This decline is likely related to new research and changes in economic conditions. Recent research has determined that lower, more frequent nutrient doses gave the same biological response as larger, less frequent doses; improved our understanding and use of urease inhibitors; and quantified the upper limit to pine productivity in the southeast United States. All of these factors combined with economic concerns including the continued low number of housing starts, a large inventory of stands with trees that are already sawtimber size, and low sawtimber prices influence forest managers’ decisions about fertilization. However, fertilization increases carbon sequestration in forests, and carbon markets that recognize this contribution to sequestration are developing and may provide additional income to forest managers and, ultimately, increase the area fertilized.</abstract><cop>US</cop><pub>Oxford University Press</pub><doi>10.1093/forsci/fxy058</doi><tpages>8</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9810-8834</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4929-7613</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0015-749X |
ispartof | Forest science, 2019-05, Vol.65 (3), p.355-362 |
issn | 0015-749X 1938-3738 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2246695399 |
source | Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current); EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals |
subjects | Age Agricultural production Carbon Carbon sequestration Census of Population Economic conditions Economics Fertilization Fertilizer application Fertilizers Forest management Forestry Greenhouse gases Housing starts Information management Inventory Nitrogen Phosphorus Plantations Productivity Silviculture Urease |
title | Forest Fertilizer Applications in the Southeastern United States from 1969 to 2016 |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-26T21%3A25%3A10IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Forest%20Fertilizer%20Applications%20in%20the%20Southeastern%20United%20States%20from%201969%20to%202016&rft.jtitle=Forest%20science&rft.au=Albaugh,%20Timothy%20J&rft.date=2019-05-21&rft.volume=65&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=355&rft.epage=362&rft.pages=355-362&rft.issn=0015-749X&rft.eissn=1938-3738&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093/forsci/fxy058&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2246695399%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2246695399&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_oup_id=10.1093/forsci/fxy058&rfr_iscdi=true |