28.03.2013 Views

sdu faculty of forestry journal special edition 2009 - Orman Fakültesi

sdu faculty of forestry journal special edition 2009 - Orman Fakültesi

sdu faculty of forestry journal special edition 2009 - Orman Fakültesi

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

SDÜ ORMAN FAKÜLTESİ DERGİSİ<br />

Table 2: Results <strong>of</strong> Köprülü Kanyon sampling area<br />

Sampling<br />

plot<br />

No <strong>of</strong> trees<br />

No <strong>of</strong><br />

trees with<br />

cankers<br />

Proportion<br />

<strong>of</strong> trees with<br />

cankers<br />

(%)<br />

145<br />

(trees with<br />

cankers)<br />

average values<br />

for; (cm)<br />

Height D1,3<br />

Average<br />

height <strong>of</strong><br />

cankers above<br />

ground<br />

(cm)<br />

KKK1 30 5 16.7 282.6 3.4 66.3<br />

KKK2 162 62 38.3 385.6 7.3 91.3<br />

KKK3 127 17 13.4 262.9 6.1 133.0<br />

KKK4 56 32 57.1 490.0 6.0 119.1<br />

KKK5 36 15 41.7 250.0 3.3 23.0<br />

KKK6 38 3 7.9 491.7 7.5 53.6<br />

Total 449 134 - - - -<br />

Avarage 74.83 22.33 29.2 360.5 5.6 81.1<br />

In Aydıncık, the number <strong>of</strong> trees per sampling plot varied from 28 to 86 with a<br />

mean value <strong>of</strong> 57.4 (±21SD). The average tree height and diameter in the whole<br />

Aydıncık sampling area were 586.7 (±368.8 SD) and 14.9 cm (±12.6 SD),<br />

respectively. There were significant differences in average diameter and height <strong>of</strong><br />

trees between sampling plots (Table 3). While the highest averages were in the<br />

sampling plot M7, the lowest ones were in the M8. On the other hand, correlations<br />

<strong>of</strong> symptom incidences with tree size (Table 4) were not significant, with the<br />

exception <strong>of</strong> the negative correlation between tree diameter and foliage symptoms.<br />

The highest canker incidence was in the M5 plot (52.3%), followed by the M8,<br />

M4, M9, M3 plots (range approximately 40-50%). The canker incidence (7.7%) as<br />

well as the other assessed symptoms had the lowest values in the M6 plot. The<br />

highest incidence <strong>of</strong> top dieback, crown dieback, resin exudation, and foliage<br />

symptoms was in the M9 (23.5%), M4 (18.1%), M8 (66.2%) and M10 plots<br />

(51.0%), respectively. Insect damage was the most frequent in the M8 plot (53.8%)<br />

and occasional in the M1 plot (3.6%).<br />

Table 3: Number and size <strong>of</strong> trees and incidence <strong>of</strong> symptoms in the sampling plots in<br />

Aydıncık.<br />

Sampling<br />

plot<br />

No <strong>of</strong> trees<br />

Diameter<br />

cm<br />

Tree sizes Number <strong>of</strong> individuals exhibiting symptoms <strong>of</strong>; .<br />

Height<br />

cm<br />

Canker<br />

Top<br />

dieback<br />

Crown<br />

dieback<br />

Resin<br />

exudation<br />

Foliage<br />

symptoms<br />

M1 28 17.6±11.9b 555.5±319.8b 6 1 1 4 1 1<br />

M2 53 15.0±10.2bc 572.8±374.7ab 16 3 1 10 5 1<br />

M3 83 15.4±11.9bc 609.3±380.3ab 33 8 11 47 5 9<br />

M4 83 15.2±12.7bc 634.8±415.8ab 36 9 15 50 17 20<br />

M5 86 13.0±10.0bc 583.3±307.9ab 45 5 7 50 17 22<br />

M6 39 17.3±11.8b 606.8±264.7ab 3 0 0 3 3 3<br />

M7 37 24.8±20.0a 734.4±480.1a 12 4 3 20 6 18<br />

M8 65 10.5±6.0c 497.4±353.1b 32 6 8 43 18 35<br />

M9 51 12.7±10.7bc 497.4±353.1b 21 12 9 24 23 15<br />

M10 49 14.6±16.8bc 576.8±481.4ab 14 4 2 27 25 18<br />

Σ 574 - - 218 52 57 278 120 142<br />

Avr.<br />

± SD<br />

57.4±20.9 14.9±12.6<br />

586.7±368.8<br />

Insect<br />

Damage<br />

21.8±14.0 5.2±3.7 5.7±5.1 27.8±18.7 12.0±8.9 14.2±10.8

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!