Talk:Pinus palustris

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Untitled[edit]

I'm surprised at MPF's edit, since he is normally a very good editor. But in deleting a needed addition, he was POV and discourteous. This tree is an American tree and should have American units of measurement. I noticed they were absent and added them, but also kept the metric. I am pro-metric, and hope the US will someday accept the system for all measurement, but not by ramming it down people's throats. Showing both units of measurement is NPOV; showing only metric, especially for an American species is not. Edit away, Mike; you usually are very level headed; but don't REQUIRE everyone to use your system, and ONLY your system. Pollinator 22:05, Jan 29, 2005 (UTC)

In editing, I changed quite a few of the figures to accord with the references I added (both American, both metric!) and added some new data as well. That would have left over half of the measures with no imperial, a few with, which looks silly, so I tidied the others out. I can add the imperial stuff if you think it is necessary, though it is tedious to do all the calculations. An American tree yes, but it is first and foremost a science article, so should have scientific measures in first place. - MPF 22:54, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Done; I think it makes the page very cluttered and difficult to read though. - MPF 23:05, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Longleaf found further south[edit]

The Longleaf pine can be found as far south as northern Florida. Thus the correction. See sources at article bottom. Noles1984 20:43, 20 August 2006 (UTC)


The longleaf pine also grows in much of southern Maryland and most of the lower half on the "eastern shore" of Maryland. I'm having difficulty finding a proper source, but I have lived in Somerset and Wicomico counties and longleaf pines were abundant. If anyone can find an acceptable source, please edit. Tjjackson63 (talk) 19:35, 4 October 2009 (UTC)Tjjackson63

These pines are in fact very abundant on Maryland's eastern shore and you can find a few south/east of the fall line on the western shore. If they are another pine they are the identical twin to these pines. As well as sussex county Deleware where they are also very abundant. MarylandSonOfTheSouth —Preceding undated comment added 01:01, 11 April 2012 (UTC).

Melting point of southern yellow pine resin?[edit]

Wozniak says that the resin/sap of the southern yellow pine has a unique property that could lead to efficient heating/cooling. Does anyone have info on this? See [1] 216.160.20.207

I will answer back to say that Longleaf is not regarded as being native, or having been native to Maryland. You are thinking of loblolly pine, which is native an abundant in Maryland and parts of Delaware. -jdh245 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.125.144.226 (talk) 13:20, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

disputed size[edit]

The article says that the trees only grow to 28" in diameter, but they formerly grew to 47". This is by no means a scientific fact. There are physical examples of longleaf pines in the Congaree National Park that are probably 36" in diameter right off the trails. These trees may or may not still be alive... I know that Hurricane Hugo in 1988 caused a whole lot of irreparable damage, killing trees that were over a hundred years old. However, I do believe at least a few of these trees survived the hurricane and can be seen towering over the rest of the forest. I know it took at least three people to wrap around the circumference of the tree, and just guessing, that's about 3' in diameter.167.7.17.3 (talk) 12:47, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

These pines are in fact very abundant on Maryland's eastern shore and you can find a few south/east of the fall line on the western shore. If they are another pine they are the identical twin to these pines. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MarylandSonOfTheSouth (talkcontribs) 00:58, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Bad Information- incorrect, misleading and contrary.[edit]

I would edit out the incorrect writings, but this article is no longer editable by regular people.

The restoration section contains completely wrong information which is contrary to every other piece of credible information which can be found on longleaf pine. The article states that longleaf was not present in the North Carolina Piedmont, and that it is now present in large quantities. Also, it is stated that this is at the expense of native species. First, longleaf pine is not loblolly pine, which is now present in large quantities in the Piedmont. Longleaf pine is no longer abundant over most of the southeast, and the North Carolina Piedmont is no exception. Second, longleaf was present in the Piedmont of North Carolina, but in generally limited areas around the fringe of that physiographic province. There were and are native pines in that area, and loblolly is and was a primary species. Large areas of loblolly are planted and harvested in plantations, and this does occur at the expense of other native hardwoods and herbaceous plants, but longleaf is not used and it is not an aggressive seeder. Who ever wrote the incorrect information confused longleaf for loblolly, and does not realize that loblolly is a native species which was found on the piedmont prior to white settlers, however it is one which is being used in an unnatural commercial manner today. The information found in the restoration section is incorrect, misleading, contrary, and should be removed to restore this article to some level of credibility. As it exists, the article is lying, and has no credibility. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.125.144.226 (talk) 13:16, 9 April 2011 (UTC) I have since been allowed to edit the page and removed the incorrect information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.125.144.226 (talk) 13:24, 9 April 2011 (UTC) --Actually, I have been to the Congree and I know the trees you mention. They are loblolly pines, not longleaf pines. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.171.47.169 (talk) 14:26, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Loblolly and Longleaf[edit]

I noticed a lot of the discussion and bad information found in the article is based on a confusion between longleaf and loblolly pines. I suggest people learn to differentiate between them, and that they review the range and silviculture of them. This article has some discrepancies based on confusing the two pine species, and the discussion further confuses them by talking about longleaf, when it is loblolly, in Maryland and the Congaree.75.171.47.169 (talk) 14:31, 10 April 2011 (UTC)jh23774

Hmm! I don't see any identification of which species of pine is being discussed in the cited source for the paragraphs you removed, so I agree with the removal. There may indeed be reliable sources for longleaf pines (particularly in plantations) replacing other plant communities, but such weren't cited. -- Donald Albury 16:14, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Actually, while longleaf was once a dominant species over much of the south, it is not useful for plantation forestry due to it's grass stage and slower initial growth. Loblolly and Slash pines are the preferred plantation pines in the south, and only in very rare cases is longleaf used in a plantation setting. Since plantations are an investment, and not simply an evil tool set about to destroy ecosystems, longleaf would not be planted outside of it's natural range in areas like the Piedmont which have numerous competing trees and damaging agents. Loblolly is far more successful in rapid establishment and growth. Despite the removal, the incorrect information continues to return. I have reported this several times, but it returns again and again.75.171.37.96 (talk) 01:11, 12 April 2011 (UTC)jh23774