Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Ahead of Print
    • Current Issue
    • Special Issues
    • All Issues
  • Contribute
    • Submit to AUF
    • Author Guidelines
    • Reviewer Guidelines
  • About
    • Overview
    • Editorial Board
    • Journal Metrics
    • International Society of Arboriculture
  • More
    • Contact
    • Feedback
  • Alerts

User menu

  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
Arboriculture & Urban Forestry
  • Log in
Arboriculture & Urban Forestry

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Ahead of Print
    • Current Issue
    • Special Issues
    • All Issues
  • Contribute
    • Submit to AUF
    • Author Guidelines
    • Reviewer Guidelines
  • About
    • Overview
    • Editorial Board
    • Journal Metrics
    • International Society of Arboriculture
  • More
    • Contact
    • Feedback
  • Alerts
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • LinkedIn
Research ArticleArticles

The Effects of Integrated Vegetation Management on Richness of Native Compatible Flowering Plants and Abundance of Noncompatible Tree Species on a Right-of-Way in Central Pennsylvania, USA

Carolyn G. Mahan, Bradley D. Ross and Richard T. Yahner
Arboriculture & Urban Forestry (AUF) November 2020, 46 (6) 395-401; DOI: https://doi.org/10.48044/jauf.2020.029
Carolyn G. Mahan
Carolyn G. Mahan, PhD (corresponding author), The Pennsylvania State University-Altoona College, Division of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Altoona, PA, USA, 814-949-5530
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: [email protected]
Bradley D. Ross
Bradley D. Ross, MS, The Pennsylvania State University-Altoona College, Division of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Altoona, PA, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Search for this author on this site
Richard T. Yahner
Richard T. Yahner, BS, The Pennsylvania State University-Altoona College, Division of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Altoona, PA, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Tables

    • View popup
    Table 1.

    Liters of herbicide applied/hectare (ha) in 2012, native flowering plant species richness, and number of trees/ha (< 0.3 m in height) in wire zones of 14 treatment sections on State Game Lands 33 Rights-of-Way Research and Demonstration Area, Centre County, PA, USA in 2016. Dominant (> 50% of area) cover type (forb, grass, or shrub) for wire zone is also presented.

    Liters of herbicide applied/ha (2012 treatment cycle)Number of stems of trees/haaNative species richness of compatible flowering plant speciesbIntegrated vegetation management herbicide (H) versus mechanical (M) treatmentHerbicide application (selective [backpack spray] or nonselective [broadcast spray])Cover type
    014827M (Mowing)N/AShrub
    027189M (Mowing)N/AForb
    011,61311M (Hand cutting)N/AShrub
    0345925M (Hand cutting)N/AShrub
    0.754948H (Glyphosate, Imazapyr)cSelectiveGrass
    0.757418H (Glyphosate, Imazapyr)SelectiveForb
    0.754946H (Glyphosate, Imazapyr)SelectiveForb
    6.272477H (Aminopyralid, Imazapyr, Triclopyr)dSelectiveForb
    29.93172915H (Aminopyralid, Imazapyr, Triclopyr)BroadcastForb
    31.9974110H (Aminopyralid, Imazapyr, Triclopyr)BroadcastShrub
    168.37019H (Aminopyralid, Imazapyr)eBroadcastForb
    241.3349410H (Aminopyralid, Imazapyr)SelectiveShrub
    436.822005H (Aminopyralid, Glyphosate, Imazapyr, Picloram, Triclopyr)fBroadcastGrass
    436.821007H (Aminopyralid, Glyphosate, Imazapyr, Picloram, Triclopyr)BroadcastForb
    • ↵aMechanical treatments versus herbicide treatments differed significantly (t = 3.10, df = 1, p = 0.009); mechanical treatments versus glyphosate herbicide treatments differed slightly (t = 2.18, df = 1, p = 0.06); mechanical treatments versus non-glyphosate herbicide treatments differed slightly (t = 2.03, df =1, p = 0.08); glyphosate versus non-glyphosate herbicide treatments did not differ (t = −0.74, df =1, p = 0.481).

    • ↵bMechanical treatments versus herbicide treatments did not differ (t = 1.06, df = 1, p = 0.31); mechanical treatments versus glyphosate herbicide treatments differed slightly (t = 1.81, df = 1, p = 0.09); mechanical treatments versus non-glyphosate treatments did not differ (t = 0.19, df = 1, p = 0.86); glyphosate versus non-glyphosate herbicide treatments differed significantly (t = −2.44, df = 1, p = 0.04).

    • ↵cAccord concentrate (glyphosate) 7% + Arsenal (imazapyr) 1%

    • ↵dGarlon 3A (triclopyr) 5 pints/100 gal (2 L/380 L) + Milestone (aminopyralid) 7 oz/100 gal (210 mL/380 L) + Arsenal (imazapyr) 1%

    • ↵eMilestone (aminopyralid) 5 oz/100 gal (150 mL/380 L) + Arsenal (imazapyr) 4 oz/100 gal (120 mL/380 L)

    • ↵fMilestone (aminopyralid) 7 oz/100 gal (210 mL/380 L) + Rodeo (glyphosate) 1% + Arsenal (imazapyr) 1% + Tordon K (picloram) 4% + Garlon 3A (triclopyr) 5 pints/100 gal (2 L/380 L)

    • View popup
    Table 2.

    Compatible, native flowering plant species and noncompatible native tree species documented on 14 treatment sections of State Game Lands 33 Rights-of-Way Research and Demonstration Area, Centre County, PA, USA in 2016.

    Species common name (Latin name)Compatible flowering plantsNoncompatible trees
    Arrowwood (Viburnum dentatum)X
    Bear oak (Quercus ilicifolia)X
    Black cherry (Prunus serotine)X
    Black huckleberry (Gaylussacia baccata)X
    Blackberry (Rubus allegheniensis)X
    Canada mayflower (Maianthemum canadense)X
    Chestnut oak (Quercus montana)X
    Choke cherry (Prunus virginiana)X
    Common milkweed (Asclepias syriaca)X
    Dogbane (Apocynum cannabinum)X
    Goldenrod (Solidago sp.)X
    Hawthorn (Crataegus sp.)X
    Hillside blueberry (Vaccinium pallidum)X
    Indian cucumber (Medeola virginiana)X
    Lowbush blueberry (Vaccinium angustifolium)X
    Mayapple (Podophyllum peltatum)X
    Moccasin flower (Cypripedium acaule)X
    Mountain azalea (Rhododendron canescens)X
    Mountain laurel (Kalmia latifolia)X
    Mountain mint (Pycnanthemum virginianum)X
    Painted trillium (Trillium undulatum)X
    Pennsylvania smartweed (Polygonum pensylvanicum)X
    Red maple (Acer rubrum)X
    Red oak (Quercus rubra)X
    Sedge (Carex sp.)X
    Spicebush (Lindera benzoin)X
    Spiraea (Spiraea tomentosa)X
    Stinging nettle (Urtica dioica)X
    Teaberry (Gaultheria procumbens)X
    Tulip tree (Liriodendron tulipifera)X
    Virginia creeper (Parthenocissus quinquefolia)X
    White oak (Quercus alba)X
    Wild sarsaparilla (Aralia nudicaulis)X
    Witch hazel (Hamamelis virginian)X
    Wood lily (Lilium philadelphicum)X
    Yellow whorled loosestrife (Lysimachia quadrifolia)X
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Arboriculture & Urban Forestry (AUF): 46 (6)
Arboriculture & Urban Forestry (AUF)
Vol. 46, Issue 6
November 2020
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Index by author
Print
Download PDF
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Arboriculture & Urban Forestry.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
The Effects of Integrated Vegetation Management on Richness of Native Compatible Flowering Plants and Abundance of Noncompatible Tree Species on a Right-of-Way in Central Pennsylvania, USA
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Arboriculture & Urban Forestry
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Arboriculture & Urban Forestry web site.
Citation Tools
The Effects of Integrated Vegetation Management on Richness of Native Compatible Flowering Plants and Abundance of Noncompatible Tree Species on a Right-of-Way in Central Pennsylvania, USA
Carolyn G. Mahan, Bradley D. Ross, Richard T. Yahner
Arboriculture & Urban Forestry (AUF) Nov 2020, 46 (6) 395-401; DOI: 10.48044/jauf.2020.029

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
The Effects of Integrated Vegetation Management on Richness of Native Compatible Flowering Plants and Abundance of Noncompatible Tree Species on a Right-of-Way in Central Pennsylvania, USA
Carolyn G. Mahan, Bradley D. Ross, Richard T. Yahner
Arboriculture & Urban Forestry (AUF) Nov 2020, 46 (6) 395-401; DOI: 10.48044/jauf.2020.029
del.icio.us logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Bookmark this article

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • INTRODUCTION
    • MATERIALS AND METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
    • Footnotes
    • LITERATURE CITED
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Urban Trees and Cooling: A Review of the Recent Literature (2018 to 2024)
  • Aerial Imagery as a Tool for Monitoring Urban Tree Retention: Applications, Strengths and Challenges for Backyard Tree Planting Programs
  • Contribution of Urban Trees to Ecosystem Services in Lisbon: A Comparative Study Between Gardens and Street Trees
Show more Articles

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • Early Successional Habitat
  • Forest Vegetation
  • herbicide
  • Plant Species Richness

© 2025 International Society of Arboriculture

Powered by HighWire