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

Chamber and Field Evaluations of Air Pollution Tolerances of Urban Trees

David F. Karnosky
Arboriculture & Urban Forestry (AUF) April 1981, 7 (4) 99-105; DOI: https://doi.org/10.48044/jauf.1981.023
David F. Karnosky
Forest Geneticist, NYBG Cary Arboretum, Millbrook, New York
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • Figure 1.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 1.

    Upper leaf surface necrotic stipple on a Gleditsia triacanthos inermis ‘Imperial’ leaf one week after a 7½ hour fumigation with 0.5 ppm ozone.

  • Figure 2.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 2.

    Marginal and interveinal, bifacial necrosis on Gleditsia triacanthos inermis ‘Skyline’ leaves one week after a 7½ hour fumigation with 1.00 ppm sulfur dioxide.

Tables

  • Figures
    • View popup
    Table 1.

    Tolerances (and injury index scores) of 32 urban-tree cultivars to ozone (O3) and sulfur dioxide (SO2), alone and in combination, as determined by chamber tests and to ambient oxidants (primarily ozone) as determined by field tests. The field exposure ratings are based on 3 years of field observations on the cultivars growing at 4 test sites in the greater New York City area.

    SpeciesCultivarTolerance1 (Injury index score) based on
    Chamber exposures to:Field exposure to oxidants
    O3SO2O3 + SO2oxidants
    Acer platanoidesClevelandR(0)R(2)R(0)R
    Crimson KingR(0)R(0)R(0)R
    Crimson SentryR(0)I(12)R(1)R
    ColumnarR(1)R(1)R)1)R
    Emerald QueenR(10)R(0)R(1)R
    Jade GlenR(9)R(2)R(2)R
    SchwedlerI(12)R(4)I(12)R
    SummershadeR(0)R(0)R(0)R
    Acer rubrumAutumn FlameR(0)R(0)R(0)R
    BowhallI(15)R(1)S(64)R
    Red SunsetR(0)R(1)R(0)R
    TilfordR(2)S(54)R(2)R
    Acer saccharumGoldspireR(2)R(0)S(68)R
    Green MountainR(0)R(0)R(8)R
    Temple’s UprightR(0)R(0)R(0)R
    Fagus sylvaticaRotundifoliaR(0)R(0)R(0)R
    Fraxinus americanaAutumn PurpleS(62)S(183)S(39)R
    Fraxinus excelsiorHesseiI(15)S(109)I(20)R
    Fraxinus pennsylvanicaMarshall’s SeedlessI(13)S(112)S(44)I
    SummitR(2)R(2)R(3)R
    Ginkgo bilobaAutumn GoldR(0)I(14)R(2)R
    FairmontR(0)R(1)I(14)R
    FastigiateR(0)R(3)R(1)R
    SentryR(0)R(0)R(0)R
    Gleditsia triacanthos inermisEmerald LaceS(115)R(6)R(8)R
    ImperialS(88)R(0)R(0)S
    MajesticS(80)S(104)R(0)R
    ShademasterS(76)R(0)R(1)I
    SkylineS(41)S(54)R(1)R
    SunburstS(49)S(97)R(1)I
    Platanus acerifoliaBloodgoodS(137)S(54)S(146)S
    Quercus roburFastigiateS(32)R(0)R(1)I
    • ↵1 S=sensitive, I=intermediate, R=tolerant

    • View popup
    Table 2.

    Summary of the ozone levels recorded near the four test sites. The number of days that the 1-hour ozone concentration exceeded the federal standard of 0.12 ppm are listed along with the highest 1-hour ozone levels recorded during the year growing season at each location.

    197719781979
    Monitoring Station1No. Days 0.12 ppmHighest Cone, (ppm)No. Days 0.12 ppmHighest Cone, (ppm)No. Days 0.12 ppmHighest Cone, (ppm)
    New York City50.1870.1900.12
    Poughkeepsie——40.1600.10
    New Brunswick——20.1340.16
    • ↵1 The New York City monitoring site was within 3 miles of both the Rikers Island and New York Botanical Garden tree plots and the Poughkeepsie monitoring site was within 10 miles of the Cary Arboretum tree plot The New Brunswick ozone data was taken from a site within 13 miles of the Rutgers tree plot.

    • View popup
    Table 3.

    The injury index scores for ozone symptoms on the Gleditsia triacanthos inermis ‘imperial’ and the Platanus acerifolia ‘Bloodgood’ at each site and for each year are shown below. Although there was considerable variation in the numerical scores, these two cultivars were consistently the most ozone sensitive at all four sites and for all three years.

    CultivarLocationInjury index score1
    197719781979Average
    ‘Imperial’Rikers Island19182152118
    New York Botanical Garden—21552134
    Cary Arboretum180175160172
    Rutgers—668911289
    Cultivar Average:131
    ‘Bloodgood’Rikers Island19513275134
    New York Botanical Garden—654053
    Cary Arboretum905310081
    Rutgers—114120117
    Cultivar Average:98
    • ↵1 Based on the four trees of each cultivar at each location and using the maximum injury scores for that growing season.

PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Arboriculture & Urban Forestry (AUF)
Vol. 7, Issue 4
April 1981
  • Table of Contents
  • 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.
Chamber and Field Evaluations of Air Pollution Tolerances of Urban Trees
(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
Chamber and Field Evaluations of Air Pollution Tolerances of Urban Trees
David F. Karnosky
Arboriculture & Urban Forestry (AUF) Apr 1981, 7 (4) 99-105; DOI: 10.48044/jauf.1981.023

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Chamber and Field Evaluations of Air Pollution Tolerances of Urban Trees
David F. Karnosky
Arboriculture & Urban Forestry (AUF) Apr 1981, 7 (4) 99-105; DOI: 10.48044/jauf.1981.023
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
    • Plant Materials
    • Chamber Test Methods
    • Field Text Methods
    • Chamber Test Results
    • Field Test Results
    • Discussion
    • Acknowledgment
    • 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

  • Contribution of Urban Trees to Ecosystem Services in Lisbon: A Comparative Study Between Gardens and Street Trees
  • Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) in Tree Risk Assessment (TRA): A Systematic Review
  • Thiabendazole as a Therapeutic Root Flare Injection for Beech Leaf Disease Management
Show more Articles

Similar Articles

© 2025 International Society of Arboriculture

Powered by HighWire