<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>
<oai_dc:dc xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
  <dc:contributor>John C. Tappeiner II</dc:contributor>
  <dc:creator>T.B. Harrington</dc:creator>
  <dc:date>1997</dc:date>
  <dc:description>&lt;p&gt;At two sites in southwestern Oregon, height, diameter, and crown width of young Douglas-fir (&lt;i&gt;Pseudotsuga menziesii&lt;/i&gt;) and sprout-origin tanoak (&lt;i&gt;Lithocarpus densiflorus&lt;/i&gt;) were measured 1–11 years after reducing the density of a 2-year-old tanoak stand to 0%, 25%, 50%, and 100% of its initial cover. Some plots also included suppression of understory vegetation. Tanoak cover developed linearly with time, with steepness of the growth trajectory increasing at a diminishing rate with increasing percentage of initial tanoak cover. Fifth-year cover of understory vegetation declined linearly with increasing percentage of initial tanoak cover (&lt;i&gt;R&lt;/i&gt;&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt; = 0.29). Survival of Douglas-fir (96–100%) differed little among initial abundances of tanoak, while growth trajectories for its size became increasingly exponential with decreasing percentage of initial tanoak cover. Eleventh-year heights of Douglas-fir were similar for 0%, 25%, and 50% of initial tanoak cover; however, diameter increased linearly with decreasing percentage of initial tanoak cover (&lt;i&gt;R&lt;/i&gt;&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt; = 0.73), and the slope of the relationship steepened with understory suppression. Our results indicate that young stands exhibiting a wide range of stand compositions and productivities can be established by early manipulations of tanoak and understory abundance. Complete removal of tanoak plus understory suppression are necessary to maximize Douglas-fir growth, while productive, mixed stands can be achieved by removing 50% or more of tanoak cover.&lt;/p&gt;</dc:description>
  <dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
  <dc:identifier>10.1016/S0378-1127(97)00049-2</dc:identifier>
  <dc:language>en</dc:language>
  <dc:publisher>Elsevier</dc:publisher>
  <dc:title>Growth responses of young Douglas-fir and tanoak  11 years after various levels of hardwood removal and understory suppression in southwestern Oregon, USA</dc:title>
  <dc:type>article</dc:type>
</oai_dc:dc>