Fertilization of Red Maple (Acer rubrum) and Littleleaf Linden (Tilia cordata) Trees at Recommended Rates Does Not Aid Tree Establishment

Susan D. Day; J. Roger Harris

doi:10.48044/jauf.2007.012

Article Figures & Data

Figures

Tables

Download figure
Open in new tab
Download powerpoint
Figure 1.
Cross-sectional area of trunk for red maple (Acer rubrum) and littleleaf linden (Tilia cordata) for three growing seasons after transplant under different fertilization and irrigation regimes. Measurements were taken at the end of the growing season except where indicated. Bars indicate standard error of the means of six replications. See Tables 2 and 3 for statistical comparisons.
Download figure
Open in new tab
Download powerpoint
Figure 2.
Shoot extension (mean of five shoots per replication) for red maple (Acer rubrum) and littleleaf linden (Tilia cordata) for two growing seasons after transplant under different fertilization and irrigation regimes. Bars indicate standard error of the means for six replications. See Tables 2 and 3 for statistical comparisons.
Download figure
Open in new tab
Download powerpoint

Tables

Figures

View popup

Table 1.

Abbreviations for experimental treatments applied to littleleaf linden and red maple trees.

Treatment abbreviations	Irrigation status			Fertilizer application time
Treatment abbreviations	Irrigation status	At planting	Fall 2000	Spring 2001	Fall 2001	Spring 2002	Fall 2002
FSPI	Irrigated	X^{^z}		X		X
FSI				X		X
FFI			X		X		X
NFI		-------------------------------- no fertilizer-----------------------------
FSP	Unirrigated	X		X		X
FS				X		X
FF			X		X		X
FSp			½ X^{^y}	½ X	½ X	½ X	½ X
NF		-------------------------------- no fertilizer-----------------------------

↵^zAn “X” indicates fertilizer was applied at this time at 1.5 kg N/100 m² (3 lb N/1000 ft²)
↵^yA “½ X” indicates half-rate application at this time (0.75 kg N/100 m² [1.5 lb N/1000 ft²]).

View popup

Table 2.

Red maple (Acer rubrum) P values of a priori contrasts for cross-sectional trunk area growth for 3 years after transplanting, shoot extension (mean of five shoots per replication) for 2 years after transplanting, and leaf nitrogen content (pooled sample of five leaves per replication) the third year after transplanting.

	Trunk^{^z} growth 2000	Trunk growth 2001	Trunk growth 2002	Shoot^{^y} extension 2000	Shoot extension 2001	Leaf^{^x} nitrogen 2002
Contrasts				P > F
Irrigated, fertilized at planting vs. not fertilized at planting (FSPI vs. FSI)	0.158	0.757	0.013	0.093	0.438	0.373
Not irrigated, fertilized at planting vs. not fertilized at planting (FSP vs. FS)	0.339	0.598	0.959	0.562	0.392	0.209
Irrigated, spring fertilization vs. fall fertilization (FSI vs. FFI)	0.147	0.799	0.014	0.257	0.654	0.117
Irrigated, fertilized vs. not fertilized (FSPI, FSI, FFI vs. NFI)	0.431	0.617	0.624	0.592	0.370	0.190
Fertilized, irrigated vs. not irrigated (FSPI, FSI, FFI vs. FSP, FS, FF, FSp)	0.604	0.081	0.123	0.966	0.179	0.193
Not fertilized, irrigated vs. not irrigated (NFI vs. NF)	0.362	0.418	0.495	0.717	0.065	0.612
Not irrigated, spring fertilization vs. ½ spring + ½ fall (FS vs. FSp)	0.312	0.986	0.396	0.190	0.521	0.700
Not irrigated, fall fertilization vs. ½ spring + ½ fall (FF vs. FSp)	0.758	0.348	0.690	0.267	0.339	0.626
Fall fertilization vs. spring fertilization (FSI, FFI vs. FS, FF)	0.606	0.371	0.139	0.515	0.602	0.606

↵^zContrasts are for rate of change from multivariate repeated measures analysis of variance (n = 6).
↵^yn = 6 with five subsamples per replication.
↵^xNitrogen content is percent of dry weight (n = 4).

View popup

Table 3.

Littleleaf linden (Tilia cordata) P values of a priori contrasts for cross-sectional trunk area growth for 3 years after transplanting, mean shoot extension (mean of five shoots per replication) for 2 years after transplanting, and leaf nitrogen content (pooled sample of five leaves per replication) the third year after transplanting.

	Trunk^{^z} growth 2000	Trunk growth 2001	Trunk growth 2002	Shoot^{^y} extension 2000	Shoot extension 2001	Leaf^{^x} nitrogen 2002
Contrasts				P > F
Irrigated, fertilized at planting vs. not fertilized at planting (FSPI vs. FSI)	0.308	0.288	0.569	0.558	0.184	0.880
Not irrigated, fertilized at planting vs. not fertilized at planting (FSP vs. FS)	0.757	0.432	0.288	0.222	0.533	0.603
Irrigated, spring fertilization vs. fall fertilization (FSI vs. FFI)	0.763	0.892	0.514	0.621	0.558	0.499
Irrigated, fertilized vs. not fertilized (FSPI, FSI, FFI vs. NFI)	0.588	0.793	0.362	0.716	0.343	0.433
Fertilized, irrigated vs. not irrigated (FSPI, FSI, FFI vs. FSP, FS, FF, FSp)	0.333	0.084	0.276	0.240	0.160	0.251
Not fertilized, irrigated vs. not irrigated (NFI vs. NF)	0.840	0.394	0.607	0.019	0.914	0.102
Not irrigated, spring fertilization vs. ½ spring + ½ fall (FS vs. FSp)	0.248	0.812	0.937	0.306	0.787	0.027
Not irrigated, fall fertilization vs. ½ spring + ½ fall (FF vs. FSp)	0.336	0.036	0.470	0.701	0.547	0.021
Fall fertilization vs. spring fertilization (FSI, FFI vs. FS, FF)	0.725	0.212	0.360	0.916	0.840	0.574

↵^zContrasts are for rate of change from multivariate repeated measures analysis of variance (n = 6).
↵^yn = 6 with five subsamples per replication.
↵^xNitrogen content is percent of dry weight (n = 4).