Liriodendron tulipifera, tuliptree
Griffith, Randy Scott. 1991. Liriodendron tulipifera, tuliptree. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available: https://research.fs.usda.gov/feis/species-reviews/lirtul
| Abbreviation | Common Name | Scientific Name | Classification | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Plants | ||||
| LIRTUL | tuliptree | Liriodendron tulipifera | Life Form: Plants/Tree Kingdom: Plantae Class: Dicot Order: Magnoliales Family: Magnoliaceae Genus: Liriodendron | Fed. Protected: No Nativity: Native Invasiveness: Noninvasive |
Taxonomy
The scientific name of tuliptree is Liriodendron tulipifera L. (Magnoliaceae) [30].
Synonyms
- Liriodendron tulipifera var. fastigiatum (L.) Jaeq.
- Liriodendron tulipifera var. obtusilobum (L.) Michx.
- Liriodendron tulipifera forma aureomarginatum Schwerin
- Liriodendron tulipifera forma integrifolium Kirchr. [28]
Other Common Names
blue-poplar, tulip-poplar, yellow-poplar, yellow wood
General Distribution
Tuliptree occurs in eastern North America. The species ranges from Vermont, west through southern Ontario and Michigan, south to Louisiana, and east to northern Florida [1,2].
States and Provinces
- United States: AL AR CT DE FL GA IL IN KY LA MD MA MI MS MO NJ NY NC OH PA RI SC TN VT VA WV
- Canada: ON
Site Characteristics
Tuliptree.
Tuliptree grows best on north and east aspects, lower slopes, sheltered coves, and gentle concave slopes [1,27].
Soils: Growth is best on moderately deep loams that are moderately moist, well drained, and loose textured [1,27].
Associated species: Overstory associates include baldcypress (Taxodium distichum), tupelo (Nyssa spp.), loblolly pine (Pinus taeda), shortleaf pine (P. echinata), eastern white pine (P. strobus), oaks (Quercus spp.), white ash (Fraxinus americana), American beech (Fagus grandifolia), black walnut (Juglans nigra), and hickory (Carya spp.) [1,2].
Climate: Tuliptree grows under a variety of climatic conditions due its broad geographic distribution. The average rainfall varies from 30 to 80 inches (760-2030 mm), and the number of frost-free days varies from 150 to 310 days [1].
Elevation: Tuliptree grows near sea level in Florida to 4,500 feet (1,364 m) in the Appalachian Mountains [3].
Plant Communities
No entry.
Botanical Description
Tuliptree leaves.
Tuliptree is a tall, deciduous, long-lived, broadleaf tree. The leaves are alternate with a distinctive tuliplike shape. In forest stands tuliptree is one of the straightest and tallest trees, with approximately 66 percent of the bole free of lateral branches [1,2]. It can reach heights of 200 feet (61 m) and a d.b.h. greater than 10 feet (3 m) [13]. The flowers are tuliplike in size and shape [1,2,11]. The fruit is a conelike structure consisting of many winged samaras on a central stalk [2].
Raunkiaer Life Form (Raunkiaer 1934)
- Phanerophyte
Seasonal Development
Tuliptree flowers from April to June; seeds mature from August to late October. Peak samara dispersal is from October to November, with a few falling as late as March [2,26].
Regeneration Processes
Tuliptree is mainly insect pollinated, with some selfing. It a prolific seed producer. It first produces seed at 15 to 20 years of age and continues to do so for more than 200 years [1]. Heavy seed crops tend to compensate for low seed viability (around 5-20 percent) [26]. The samaras are wind dispersed to distances 4 and 5 times the height of the parent tree. The samaras remain viable in the seedbank for up to 8 years [5,16,19]. Seeds require a cold stratification period, and germination rates vary with time and temperature. Generally as temperature decreases and time increases the germination rate increases; for example, 90 percent germination occurred after 140 days at 36 degrees Fahrenheit (2 deg C) [1,3]. Germination is epigeal and occurs when seeds remain constantly moist for several weeks [3,5]. Germination is enhanced on mineral soil or on well-decomposed humus [2].
Tuliptree sprouts from dormant buds located on the root crown after cutting and/or fire. Sprouting decreases with age, as the bark becomes too thick for the bud to break through [2,16]. Initially sprout growth surpasses seedling growth, but at 25 to 35 years seedling regeneration height catches and surpasses sprout regeneration height [2].
Successional Status
Tuliptree is a shade-intolerant, pioneer species. It often invades open sites, and in old-field succession it occurs in pure or nearly pure stands [1,16].
Immediate Fire Effects
Tuliptree seedlings and saplings have thin bark which makes them very susceptible to fire damage. Fire generally kills young trees less than 1 inch (2.5 cm) in diameter. Once bark is thick enough to insulate the cambium (0.5 inch [1.3 cm]), tuliptree becomes extremely resistant to fire damage [1,2]. Little mortality occurs once trees are greater than 3 or 4 inches d.b.h. [31]. Tuliptree seeds are generally resistant to heat damage [31].
Compared with other hardwoods, tuliptree is relatively resistance to fire-damage-induced decay. A study comparing wound size with amounts of bark discoloration found that tuliptrees were more resistant to wounding than oaks. Even when large amounts of bark were discolored, larger diameter tuliptrees developed only small wounds [31]. Several studies have determined that within a given size class, tuliptree is generally more resistant to fire damage than oaks [31].
Postfire Regeneration Strategy (Stickney 1989)
- Tree with adventitious-bud root crown/soboliferous species root sucker
- Ground residual colonizer (on-site, initial community)
- Secondary colonizer - off-site seed
Fire Adaptations
Mature tuliptrees have bark sufficiently thick (> 0.5 inch [1 cm]) to insulate the cambium layer and allow trees to survive low- to moderate-severity fire. Trees top-killed by fire sprout from dormant buds located on the root crown [2]. Fire can enhance tuliptree seedling establishment [31].
Plant Response to Fire
Sprouting: Tuliptree sprouts from the root crown following top-kill by fire [2,16].
Seedling establishment: Prescribed fire enhances the regeneration of tuliptree by releasing seed stored on the forest floor [31]. Following fall prescribed fire in the Upper Piedmont of South Carolina, the number and height growth of tuliptree seedlings were significantly higher on burned than on unburned plots. After one growing season, the burned plots had about 12,000 seedlings per acre; the unburned, 2,000. After three growing seasons, seedlings on the burned plots averaged 3.5 feet (1.06 m) in height; seedlings on the unburned plots averaged 3.0 feet (0.91 m) [26].
While mature tuliptree is very fire resistant, the saplings are susceptible to fire [1]. In a 5-year-old stand burned with varying severities, the densities of saplings over 4.5 feet (1.4 m) in height 3 years (areas 1 and 3) and 2 years (areas 2 and 4) after fire had decreased significantly from prefire densities. Sapling densities were as follows [22]:
| Tuliptree sapling density | Area 1 burn (moderate) | Area 2 burn (light) | Area 3 no burn (control) | Area 4 burn (severe) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Saplings (stems/acre) | 709 | 74 | 677 | 294 |
| Postfire change | -438 | -21 | +23 | -8 |
Severe basal wounding of 8- to 18-inch-diameter tuliptrees had no significant effect on diameter growth rate 7 to 14 years after a fire [31].
The following Research Project Summaries provide information on prescribed fire and postfire response of plant community species, including tuliptree, that was not available when this species review was written:
- Early postfire effects of a prescribed fire in the southern Appalachians of North Carolina
- Effects of experimental burning on understory plants in a temperate deciduous forest in Ohio
- Effects of surface fires in a mixed red and eastern white pine stand in Michigan
Fire Regimes
For fire regime information, search FEIS for this species by entering the species name or acronym on the home page and selecting “Fire Regime” as the publication type.
Fire Management Considerations
No entry.
Federal Status
None
Other Status
No entry.
Importance to Wildlife and Livestock
Livestock prefer the foliage and stems of tuliptree over those of other tree species. Young trees are often heavily browsed, and seedlings are frequently eliminated by browsing or trampling [1]. Cattle or other browsers create "browse lines" on older trees [2].
White-tailed deer browse tuliptree during all seasons [23]. Northern bobwhites, purple finches, cottontails, red squirrels, gray squirrels, and white-footed mice consume the samaras [2]. Yellow-bellied sapsuckers use the phloem, and ruby-throated hummingbirds consume nectar from the flowers [21].
Palatability and Nutritional Value
Tuliptree has been rated fair in palatability for livestock, white-tailed deer, small mammals, upland game birds, and songbirds [4].
Cover Value
Tuliptrees in various stages of growth provide hiding and thermal cover for white-tailed deer, small mammals, upland game birds, waterfowl, and nongame birds [21]. They provide habitat for the endangered red-cockaded woodpecker [15].
Value for Rehabilitation or Restoration of Disturbed Sites
Tuliptree has been planted onto surface coal mine reclamation sites with variable results, but total failures are rare [7,29]. One-year-old seedlings planted on sites in Kentucky and Illinois showed good survival rates (24 percent) for 30 years after planting. Tuliptree should be planted in mixtures with other hardwoods. Tuliptree growth under decadent black locust (Robinia pseudoacacia) in Indiana was good. In eastern Kentucky height growth nearly doubled when tuliptree was interplanted with European alder (Alnus glutinosa) [29]. One-year-old seedlings are recommended for planting [29].
The lower pH limit for tuliptree on acid mine spoils is 4.5 [29]. Liming the spoils before planting has improved tuliptree establishment on acid spoils in Pennsylvania [14].
Other Uses
Tuliptree flower.
Tuliptree has been valued as an ornamental since 1663. The tuliplike flowers and leaves are aesthetically pleasing [2]. The flowers are also valuable nectar producers. The flowers from a 20-year-old tree produce enough nectar to yield 4 pounds (1.8 kg) of honey [1].
Tuliptree was used medicinally in the late 1800's: a heart stimulant was extracted from the inner bark of the root [13], and a tonic for treating rheumatism and dyspepsia was extracted from stem bark [28].
Wood Products Value: Tuliptree wood is used for construction grade lumber and plywood [1]. It has straight grain, little shrinkage, and excellent gluing qualities [2]. In the past it was used for carriage bodies, shingles, saddle frames, and interior finish wood. It is currently used for cabinets, veneer, furniture, and pulp [2]. Tuliptree has only fair value as a fuelwood but good value as kindling [4].
Other Management Considerations
Insects: Compared with other commercial species, tuliptree is relatively free of pests. Only four insect species have important impact on harvest. Tuliptree scale (Toumeyella liriodendri) and tuliptree weevil (Odontopus calceatus) feed on the buds and stems. Root collar borer (Euzophera ostricolorella) and Columbian timber beetle (Corthtlus columbianus) bore into the bole and root crown, providing pathways for other pathogens to enter the tree. The Columbian timber beetle also lowers lumber grade by creating a large black streak above and below beetle burrow entries [1,2,24].
Silviculture: Clearcutting is the recommended harvest method for tuliptree. Its seeds survive for 4 to 8 years on the forest floor, making seed tree cuts unnecessary [6]. When tuliptree is harvested in warm seasons, the wood is susceptible to a wood-staining fungi (Ceratocystis spp.) which lowers the lumber grade. Rapid processing of the logs in warm seasons reduces monetary losses from staining [2].
Season of harvest can have an impact on establishment and growth of tuliptree seedlings. In stands logged in late spring or summer, seeds may not germinate until the following year; these seedlings may not be able to compete with vegetation started the previous year. However, where a good seed source was previously present, summer cuttings usually produce an adequate number of seedlings. If the seed supply in the litter is scarce, fall, winter, or early spring harvesting may aid in seedling establishment [2].
Tuliptree is shade intolerant and responds well to overstory thinning. Tuliptree was four times taller and five times larger in d.b.h. in an 18-year-old stand where all the overstory vegetation had been removed than in the control [2]. Lamson [18] has provided information on thinning. Tuliptree responds well to fertilization. It grew twice as tall on sites fertilized with diammonium phosphate at a rate of 500 pounds per acre (562 kg/ha) than on control sites [10].
Pollution: Tuliptree is very sensitive to high ozone concentrations [8].
Table A1— Forest and range ecosystems, Bureau of Land Management (BLM) physiographic regions, Kuchler plant associations, Society for American Foresters (SAF) forest cover types, and Society for Rangeland Management (SRM) rangeland cover types in which this species occurs.
Forest and Range Ecosystems (Garrison et al. 1977)
- FRES10 White - red - jack pine
- FRES13 Loblolly - shortleaf pine
- FRES14 Oak - pine
- FRES15 Oak - hickory
- FRES16 Oak - gum - cypress
- FRES18 Maple - beech - birch
BLM Physiographic Regions (Bernard and Brown 1977)
- No entry.
Kuchler Plant Associations (Kuchler 1964)
- K081 Oak savanna
- K082 Mosaic of K074 and K100
- K084 Cross Timbers
- K089 Black Belt
- K090 Live oak - sea oats
- K091 Cypress savanna
- K095 Great Lakes pine forest
- K099 Maple - basswood forest
- K100 Oak - hickory forest
- K102 Beech - maple forest
- K103 Mixed mesophytic forest
- K104 Appalachian oak forest
- K106 Northern hardwoods
- K107 Northern hardwoods - fir forest
- K108 Northern hardwoods - spruce forest
- K109 Transition between K104 and K106
- K110 Northeastern oak - pine forest
- K111 Oak - hickory - pine forest
- K112 Southern mixed forest
- K114 Pocosin
- K115 Sand pine scrub
SAF Cover Types (Eyre 1980)
- 21 Eastern white pine
- 22 White pine
- 51 White pine - chestnut oak
- 52 White oak - black oak - northern red oak
- 53 White oak
- 55 Northern red oak
- 57 Yellow poplar
- 58 Yellow poplar - eastern hemlock
- 59 Yellow poplar - white oak - northern red oak
- 60 Beech - sugar maple
- 64 Sassafras - persimmon
- 81 Loblolly pine
- 82 Loblolly pine - hardwood
- 87 Sweet gum - yellow poplar
- 91 Swamp chestnut oak - cherrybark oak
SRM Rangeland Cover Types (Shiflet 1994)
- No entry.
1. Beck, Donald E. 1990. Liriodendron tulipifera L. yellow poplar. In: Burns, Russell M.; Honkala, Barbara H., technical coordinators. Silvics of North America. Volume 2. Hardwoods. Agric. Handb. 654. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service: 406-416. [14001]
2. Beck, Donald E.; Della-Bianca, Lino. 1981. Tuliptree: Characteristics and management. Agric. Handb. 583. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southeastern Forest Experiment Station. 91 p. [10983]
3. Bonner, F. T.; Russell, T. E. 1974. Liriodendron tulipifera L. tuliptree. In: Schopmeyer, C. S., ed. Seeds of woody plants in the United States. Agriculture Handbook No. 450. Washington, DC: U. S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service: 508-511. [7696]
4. Carey, Andrew B.; Gill, John D. 1980. Firewood and wildlife. Res. Note 299. Broomall, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. 5 p. [9925]
5. Clark, Alexander, III; Schroeder, James G. 1986. Weight, volume, and physical properties of major hardwood species in the southern Appalachian Mountains. Res. Pap. SE-253. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southeastern Experiment Station. 63 p. [11023]
6. Clark, F. Bryan. 1962. White ash, hackberry, and yellow-poplar seed remain viable when stored in the forest litter. Indiana Academy of Science Proceedings. 1962: 112-114. [237]
7. Davidson, Walter H. 1988. Potential for planting hardwoods in the Appalachians. In: Smith, H. Clay; Perkey, Arlyn W.; Kidd, William E., Jr., eds. Guidelines for regenerating Appalachian hardwood stands: Workshop proceedings; 1988 May 24-26; Morgantown, WV. SAF Publ. 88-03. Morgantown, WV: West Virginia University Books: 255-268. [13951]
8. Davis, D. D.; Umbach, D. M.; Coppolino, J. B. 1981. Susceptibility of tree and shrub species and response of black cherry foliage to ozone. Plant Disease. 65(11): 904-907. [12517]
9. Eyre, F. H., ed. 1980. Forest cover types of the United States and Canada. Washington, DC: Society of American Foresters. 148 p. [905]
10. Farmer, R. E., Jr. 1981. Early growth of black cherry, oaks, and yellow-poplar in southern Appalachian plantings. Tree Planters' Notes. 32(3): 12-14. [12504]
11. Farmer, Robert E., Jr.; Pitcher, John A. 1981. Pollen handling for southern hardwoods. In: Agric. Handb. 587. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service: 77-83. [12654]
12. Garrison, George A.; Bjugstad, Ardell J.; Duncan, Don A.; [and others]. 1977. Vegetation and environmental features of forest and range ecosystems. Agric. Handb. 475. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 68 p. [998]
13. Hosie, R. C. 1969. Native trees of Canada. 7th ed. Ottawa, ON: Canadian Forestry Service, Department of Fisheries and Forestry. 380 p. [3375]
14. Hughes, H. Glenn. 1990. Ecological restoration: fact or fantasy on strip-mined lands in western Pennsylvania?. In: Hughes, H. Glenn; Bonnicksen, Thomas M., eds. Restoration '89: the new management challenge: Proceedings, 1st annual meeting of the Society for Ecological Restoration; 1989 January 16-20; Oakland, CA. Madison, WI: The University of Wisconsin Arboretum, Society for Ecological Restoration: 237-243. [14699]
15. Kalisz, Paul J.; Boettcher, Susan E. 1991. Active and abandoned red-cockaded woodpecker habitat in Kentucky. Journal of Wildlife Management. 55(1): 146-154. [13837]
16. Kelty, Matthew J. 1988. Sources of hardwood regeneration and factors that influence these sources. In: Smith, H. Clay; Perkey, Arlyn W.; Kidd, William E., Jr., eds. Guidelines for regenerating Appalachian hardwood stands: Workshop proceedings; 1988 May 24-26; Morgantown, WV. SAF Publ. 88-03. Morgantown, WV: West Virginia University Books: 17-30. [13931]
17. Kuchler, A. W. 1964. Manual to accompany the map of potential vegetation of the conterminous United States. Special Publication No. 36. New York: American Geographical Society. 77 p. [1384]
18. Lamson, Neil I. 1983. Precommercial thinning increases diameter growth of Appalachian hardwood stump sprouts. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry. 7(2): 93-97. [12563]
19. Loftis, David L. 1979. Partial cuts to regenerate upland hardwoods in the Southeast. In: Proceedings of the National siviculture workshop. Theme: The shelterwood regeneration method; 1979 September 17-21; Charleston, SC. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Division of Timber Management: 92-100. [11661]
20. Lyon, L. Jack; Stickney, Peter F. 1976. Early vegetal succession following large northern Rocky Mountain wildfires. In: Proceedings, Tall Timbers fire ecology conference and Intermountain Fire Research Council fire and land management symposium; 1974 October 8-10; Missoula, MT. No. 14. Tallahassee, FL: Tall Timbers Research Station: 355-373. [1496]
21. Martin, Alexander C.; Zim, Herbert S.; Nelson, Arnold L. 1951. American wildlife and plants. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc. 500 p. [4021]
22. McGee, Charles E. 1980. The effect of fire on species dominance in young upland hardwood stands. In: Proceedings, mid-south upland hardwood symposium for the practicing forester and land manager; [Date of conference unknown]; [Location of conference unknown]. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Division of State and Private Forestry: 97-104. [12706]
23. Michael, Edwin D. 1988. Effects of white-tailed deer on Appalachian hardwood regeneration. In: Smith, H. Clay; Perkey, Arlyn W.; Kidd, William E., Jr., eds. Guidelines for regenerating Appalachian hardwood stands: Workshop proceedings; 1988 May 24-26; Morgantown, WV. SAF Publ. 88-03. Morgantown, WV: West Virginia University Books: 89-96. [13936]
24. Millers, Imants; Shriner, David S.; Rizzo, David. 1989. History of hardwood decline in the eastern United States. Gen. Tech. Rep. NE-126. Bromall, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. 75 p. [10925]
25. Raunkiaer, C. 1934. The life forms of plants and statistical plant geography. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 632 p. [2843]
26. Shearin, A. T.; Bruner, Marlin H.; Goebel, N. B. 1972. Prescribed burning stimulates natural regeneration of yellow-poplar. Journal of Forestry. 70: 482-484. [10056]
27. Smalley, Glendon W. 1984. Classification and evaluation of forest sites in the Cumberland Mountains. Gen. Tech. Rep. SO-50. New Orleans, LA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station. 84 p. [9831]
28. Vines, Robert A. 1960. Trees, shrubs, and woody vines of the Southwest. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press. 1104 p. [7707]
29. Vogel, Willis G. 1981. A guide for revegetating coal minesoils in the eastern United States. Gen. Tech. Rep. NE-68. Broomall, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. 190 p. [15575]
30. USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2018. PLANTS Database, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (Producer). Available: https://plants.usda.gov/. [34262]
31. USDA Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Region. 1989. Final environmental impact statement. Vegetation management in the Coastal Plain/Piedmont. Vol. 1. Management Bulletin R8-MB-23. Atlanta, GA. 351 p. [10220]
32. Stickney, Peter F. 1989. Seral origin of species originating in northern Rocky Mountain forests. Unpublished draft on file at: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory, Missoula, MT; RWU 4403 files. 7 p. [20090]