Management Impacts on Forest Floor and Soil Organic Carbon in Northern Temperate Forests of the US

Table 1 Site characteristics of study forests.

Name (Abbreviation)	County/State	Forest Type Group	Major Soil Series/ Great Groups	Study Installed	Treatments Applied
Fernow (FWV)	Tucker/WV	Beech/Birch/Maple	Calvin, Dekalb/ Dystrudepts	1996	CC, CC with Ca and N fertilization, No harvest
Middle Mountain (MWV)	Randolph & Pocahontas/WV	Beech/Birch/Maple	Calvin, Dekalb/ Dystrudepts	1981	CC w/0.93 m² residual poles, 45% RD, 70% RD, No thinning
Kane (KPA)	Elk/PA	Beech/Birch/Maple	Hazleton, Cookport, Cavode/ Dystrudepts, Fragiudults, Endoaquults	1975	40% RD, 70% RD, No thinning (2^nd treatment in 1990)
Heiberg (HNY)	Cortland/NY	Beech/Birch/Maple	Mardin, Chippewa, Volusia/ Fragiudepts, Fragiaquepts	1970	CC, 6.9 m² /ha (30 ft²/ac) 13.7 m²/ha (60 ft²/ac), 20.6 m²/ha (90 ft²/ac)
Argonne (AWI)	Forest/WI	Beech/Birch/Maple	Wabeno, Padus, Pence/ Fragiorthods, Haplorthods	1952	CC, 13.7 m ² /ha (60 ft ² /ac), 20.6 m ² /ha (90 ft ² /ac), No thinning (thinning repeated in 1962, 72, 82)
Bartlett (BNH)	Carroll/NH	Beech/Birch/Maple	Marlow, Peru, Berkshire/ Haplorthods	1959	Heavy crop tree, Light crop tree, No thinning

CC = clearcut; m²/ha = residual basal area after thinning; RD = relative density, a measure of stocking. The study on the Fernow Experimental Forest is not a thinning experiment, but part of the Long Term Site Productivity Study (Adams et al. 2004) and includes harvesting and fertilization treatments; no partial harvests were applied. Forest Type Groups are as determined by US Forest Service Forest Inventory and Analysis classifications. Unless otherwise noted, treatments were applied at the time of study establishment only. Treatments in bold type are those compared in this study.

ISSN: 1750-0680