Effect of Container Size at Time of Planting on Tree Growth Rates for Baldcypress [Taxodium distichum (L.) Rich], Red Maple (Acer rubrum L.), and Longleaf Pine (Pinus palustris Mill.)

The ecosystem restoration and wetland mitigation industries are challenged with recreating vegetative communities at an accelerated rate, while at the same time remaining cost effective. These created systems are typically bound by permit conditions to meet certain tree growth criteria in a specified time frame, commonly five years. Stock sizes of container grown trees are generally #1, #3, or #7 (gallons). The purpose of this study was to determine the relative cost effectiveness of these planting sizes for three commonly used species and to assess whether they achieve common success criteria for height, percent survival, and percent cover. These three species are baldcypress [Taxodium distichum (L.) Rich], red maple (Acer rubrum L.), and longleaf pine (Pinus palustris Mill.). Based on the standard planting density of 174 trees/hectare, the most cost-effective size was #3 in all cases. All three sizes of baldcypress and red maple met the 3.7 m height criterion; no size of longleaf pine met the criterion. All sizes of all species failed to meet both the 85% survival standard and a theoretical minimum 50% cover calculated from canopy diameter measurements. If planting densities are increased to meet cover requirements and to offset mortality, container size #1 may be more favorable for baldcypress and red maple, but not for longleaf pine. The study was conducted in Pinellas County, Florida, U.S.