Some Sources Of Variation In Structural Characteristics Of Douglas-Fir Bark


  • William D. Ross
  • Robert L. Krahmer


This study examines variations in structure and formation of Douglas-fir bark. Development of a classification system based on the external appearance of the bark surface that would correlate with anatomical characteristics of the bark was not possible. Modification of bark by fungi was observed to occur in several specific ways, such as attacking cell walls of sclereids, removing contents from lumina of various cell types, and affecting formation of cork layers in regions associated with radial checks and fissures in the bark.


Bramble, W. C. 1936. Reaction of chestnut bark to invasion by Endothia parasitica.Am. J. Botany, 23:89-94.nChang, Y. 1954. Bark structure on North American conifers. U.S. Dep. Agr. Tech. Bull. 1095, 86 p.nEames, A. J., and L. H. MacDaniels. 1925. An introduction to plant anatomy. McGraw-Hill, New York. 364 p.nGrillos, S. T. 1956. Structure and development of the bark of Douglas-fir, Pseudotsuga menziesii. (Mirb.) Franco. Ph.D. thesis, Oregon State Univ., Corvallis. 67 p.nGrillos, S. T., and F. H. Smith. 1959. The secondary phloem of Douglas-fir. Forest Sci., 5:377-388.nGhondal, B. L. 1942. Douglas-fir cork. West Coast Lumb., 69:20-24.nHofman, J., and B. Heger. 1959. Vzrustavast hladkokorych a hrubokorych typu douglasky (Concerning the growth rate of smooth and rough bark of Douglas-fir). Preslia, 31:287-303 (German summary).nJohansen, D. A. 1940. Plant microtechnique. McGraw-Hill, Inc. 523 p.nKaufert, F. H. 1937. Factors influencing the formation of periderm in aspen. Am. J. Botany, 24:24-30.nRoss, W. D. 1970. Degradation of phenolic components of Douglas-fir bark by fungi. Ph.D. thesis, Oregon State Univ., Corvallis. 84 p.nStruckmeyer, B. E., and A. J. Riker. 1950. Wound-periderm formation in white pine trees resistant to blister rust. Phytopathology, 41: 276-281.n






Research Contributions