1. THANK YOU!
• Thank you AFA for inviting me to speak today.
• Thank you friends for the memories.
• Thank you students for the privilege of sharing the
classroom for you.

2. New Reforestation Technology Trends for
Improved Forest Health and Economic Impact
Dr. Jimmie Yeiser
University of Arkansas at Monticello
Provost and Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs
October 2, 2013
Arkansas Forestry Association

3. PURPOSE
• Consider your silviculture options

4. New Reforestation Technology Trends
• New
– Familiar but never used
– Different use for me
– Totally new and never heard of before
• Reforestation
– Genetics
– Site preparation/amelioration
– Competition control
– Planting
• Technology
– Application of scientific knowledge for practical purposes
• Trends
– Implies change over time
Jimmie Yeiser * University of Arkansas at Monticello

5. DRIVING OUR TRENDS
• Demographics
• Environmental quality
• Demand for forest resources
• Invasive species/exotics
Jimmie Yeiser * University of Arkansas at Monticello

6. TRENDS
• 1--Improved deployment strategies of genetic
material for enhanced yield and forest health
• 2--Improved site quality for higher realized genetic
performance
• 3--Improved integration of treatments for improved
yield and forest health

7. CONCEPTUAL UMBRELLA
Phenotype=Genotype+Environment+Interactions
P=the physical appearance; what you see
G=genotype; genes the tree has; potential performance
E=environment; site quality; number of silviculture
treatments practiced; realization of the genetic potential
GxE=specific genetic and environment combinations
GxT1xT2=specific treatment combinations
Jimmie Yeiser * University of Arkansas at Monticello

8. INTERACTIONS
Female 1
Female 1
Female 2
Female 2
Growth Growth
Site 1 Site 2 Site 1 Site 2
Treatment 1
Treatment 2
Growth
Site 1 Site 2
Treatment 1
Treatment 2
Growth
Site 1 Site 2
Jimmie Yeiser * University of Arkansas at Monticello

9. Height
High
Low HighMean Site Height
S LA
SE TX
N LA
S AR
Jimmie Yeiser * University of Arkansas at Monticello
Seed Source by Environment Interaction

10. 0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
T
r
e
a
t
m
e
n
t
D
B
H
(
I
N
)
Average Site DBH
24-in Subsoiling
12-in Subsoiling
Machine Planting
Hand Planting
Linear Regression
24-in Subsoiling
Linear (24-in
Subsoiling)
Linear Regression
12-in Subsoiling
Linear Regression
Machine Planting
Linear Regression
Hand Planting
F1igure 1. Linear regression of DBH for each treatment plotted over site mean DBH, for 21 upland sites. Treatments are as
follows: 24-in subsoiling and hand plant, 12-in subsoiling and hand plant, machine plant only and flat hand plant only.
Responsive
Responsive
Possibly
Responsive
LOBLOLLY PINE YEAR 7

11. CONTAINERIZED SEEDLINGS
• Loblolly pine
– Expansion of the
planting season
– Perched water tables
– Northern movement
– Western movement
– Interplant different
genetics
Jimmie Yeiser * University of Arkansas at Monticello

12. MACHINE PLANTING
• With supplements
– Water
– Fertilizer
– Root starter
– Insecticides
• Two row planters
• Containerized seedlings
Jimmie Yeiser * University of Arkansas at Monticello

13. SITE AMELIORATION
RIPPING
• Loblolly pine
– Upland, rocky sloping
sites
– Facilitate planting for
increased production
and survival
– Capture surface water
Jimmie Yeiser * University of Arkansas at Monticello

14. SITE AMELIORATION
BEDDING
• Loblolly pine
– Poorly drained sites
– Improved drainage for
increased survival and
growth
Jimmie Yeiser * University of Arkansas at Monticello

15. SITE AMELIORATION
Combination Plow
For sites with
compaction and
drainage.
Various treatments
to perform their
respective task
5n1 is the most
sophisticated of
which I am aware
Jimmie Yeiser * University of Arkansas at Monticello

16. SITE AMELIORATION
• Eco-till
– Upland/transition sites with a pan and not needing
bedding. Less costly and site disturbance than a
combination plow, harder to see the trench, drainage in
low spots may be an issue.
• Unknown (Mulch Till)
– Sites with deficient organic matter and needing tillage.
Reduced disturbance.
Jimmie Yeiser * University of Arkansas at Monticello

17. WEED
CONTROL
• Still screening chemistries
• Same chemistry
• More timings of the
products developed for
specific timings
Jimmie Yeiser * University of Arkansas at Monticello

18. Weed Control
Good Answers Lacking
Jimmie Yeiser * University of Arkansas at Monticello

19. ASSESSING OPTIONS
• Consider the new treatment contribution within the
entire silvicultural system
• Harvest
• Debris management
• Tillage Genetics Yield
• Weed control Planting stock
• Nutrition Planting spacing
• Thinning
• Harvest
Jimmie Yeiser * University of Arkansas at Monticello

20. CLOSING
• Thank you for the privilege of speaking with you
today.
• I hope that something I said today will cause you
to reflect on your silvicultural program as it
pertains to:
• Improved deployment strategies of genetic
material for improved yield and health
• Improved site quality for higher realized genetic
performance
• Improved integration of treatments for
improved yield and health
Jimmie Yeiser * University of Arkansas at Monticello

21. THANK YOU