Liquidambar styraciflua, sweetgum
Coladonato, Milo. 1992. Liquidambar styraciflua, sweetgum. 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/liqsty
| Abbreviation | Common Name | Scientific Name | Classification | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Plants | ||||
| LIQSTY | sweetgum | Liquidambar styraciflua | Life Form: Plants/Tree Kingdom: Plantae Class: Dicot Order: Hamamelidales Family: Hamamelidaceae Genus: Liquidambar | Fed. Protected: No Nativity: Native Invasiveness: Noninvasive |
Taxonomy
The currently accepted scientific name for sweetgum is Liquidambar styraciflua L. [30]. Two forms of sweetgum are recognized in horticulture. The round-lobed American sweetgum, L. styraciflua forma rotundiloba Rehd., has three to five short, rounded lobes on the leaves. Weeping American sweetgum, L. styraciflua forma pendula Rehd., has pendulous branches forming an almost columnar head [44,45]. There are no recognized subspecies or varieties.
Synonyms
- None
Other Common Names
American sweetgum, redgum, sapgum, star-leaf gum, blisted, satin-walnut, white gum, alligator-tree, opossum-tree, gum-wood, copalm balsam
General Distribution
Sweetgum grows from Connecticut southward throughout the East to central Florida and eastern Texas. It is found as far west as Missouri, Arkansas, and Oklahoma and as far north as southern Illinois. It also grows in scattered locations in northeastern and central Mexico, Guatemala, Belize, El Salvador, Honduras, and Nicaragua [14,24,42]. It is cultivated in Hawaii [50].
States and Provinces
- United States: AL AR DE FL GA HI IL IN KY LA MD MS NJ OH OK PA SC TN TX VA WV
- Mexico
Site Characteristics
Sweetgum is very tolerant of different soils and sites but grows best on the rich, moist, alluvial clay and loamy soils of river bottoms [28]. Throughout the Piedmont Plateau, sweetgum shows good growth on river and stream bottoms and shows considerable potential on many upland sites [24,34].
Common tree associates of sweetgum include spruce pine (Pinus glabra), Virginia pine (P. virginiana), red maple (Acer rubrum), box elder (A. negundo), pignut, shellbark, shagbark, and mockernut hickories (Carya glabra, C. laciniosa, C. ovata, C. tomentosa), and sugarberry (Celtis laevigata). Common understory associates include dogwood (Cornus spp.), alder (Alnus spp.), and eastern redbud (Cercis canadensis) [1,10,24].
Plant Communities
No entry.
Botanical Description
Sweetgum fruits remaining on the tree after leaf fall, Tennessee.
Sweetgum is a large, native, long-lived, deciduous tree that reaches heights of 50 to 150 feet (15-45 m) at maturity [6,14]. It is easily recognizable by the long-petioled, star-shaped leaves which have five long-pointed, saw-toothed lobes. The brown bark is deeply furrowed into narrow scaley plates or ridges. Young sweetgum trees have long conical crowns, while mature trees have crowns that are round and spreading. Sweetgum is monoecious with the male flowers in several clusters and the female flowers hanging at the end of the same stalk. The ball-shaped fruits contain many individual seed-bearing sections, and persist throughout the winter [16,18].
Raunkiaer Life Form (Raunkiaer 1934)
- Phanerophyte
Seasonal Development
Sweetgum flowers appear from March to May, depending on latitude and weather. The fruit ripens from September to November; the fruit often persists through the entire winter [6,24].
Regeneration Processes
Seed production and dissemination
Sweetgum produces an abundance of lightweight seed. The tree begins to produce seed when 20 to 30 years old, and crops remain abundant for 150 years. Fair seed crops are produced each year, with bumper crops every 2 to 3 years [2,24]. Under conditions of full sunlight and rich moist soil, each fruit may average as many as 50 sound seeds. Seed is primarily dispersed by wind; the maximum dispersal distance recorded was 600 feet (183 m) but ordinarily 96 percent of the seed fall within 200 feet (61 m) of the point of release [24,38].
Seedling development
Sod is not a serious hindrance to seed germination; however, when additional sweetgum production is desired in partially cutover stands, exposed mineral soil and abundant direct sunlight are necessary [4,22]. Root development varies with the growing site. A deep taproot and numerous horizontal rootlets usually develop early, but in wet areas the root system is shallow and wide spreading, with little or no taproot [25,39]. On an abandoned field adjacent to a swamp in Maryland, 5-year-old seedlings averaged 8.7 feet (2.6 m) in height [24]. On favorable sites in the lower Mississippi Valley, seedlings grow as much as 2 feet (0.6 m) during the first year [24,49].
Vegetative reproduction
Sweetgum is capable of sprouting until it is approximately 50 years old. Although sweetgum seedlings reach a height of 4.5 feet (1.4 m) in 3 to 5 years, sprouts often reach this height in one growing season. Ten-year old sprouts frequently have the same size and appearance as 18- to 20-year-old seedlings in the same stand [23,49].
Successional Status
Sweetgum is classified as shade intolerant [7]. In pure stands on bottomland sites, young sweetgum is able to endure some shade and crowding. With increase in age the tree becomes less tolerant of competition. Following natural decrease in the canopy, enough sunlight reaches the ground to permit an understory stand to develop [12,24]. Although sweetgum is an early invader, it seldom becomes a dominant species [20,31].
Immediate Fire Effects
Fire typically top-kills sweetgum. Hot summer fires may deplete carbohydrate reserves and eventually kill the tree [41,48].
Fire scars on living trees provide entry points for insects and diseases. As long as the sapwood is not killed by fire, basal wounds are often covered with a gum exudation that protects them. After repeated fires, however, a tree is apt to have some sapwood killed and fungi and insects may become established [24,47].
Postfire Regeneration Strategy (Stickney 1989)
- survivor species; on-site surviving root crown or caudex
- off-site colonizer; seed carried by wind; postfire years 1 and 2
Fire Adaptations
Fire is one of the major agents of damage to sweetgum. Its relatively thin bark make it highly susceptible to fire [21]. Following top-kill by fire, sweetgum sprouts from the stump or root crown [41,48].
Plant Response to Fire
Sweetgum generally sprouts prolifically when top-killed by fire. Repeated annual summer burns, however, will eventually deplete carbohydrate reserves and kill the plant [41,48].
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
Fire has been demonstrated to be a good management tool for controlling sweetgum. In the Coastal Plain of South Carolina, five consecutive summer fires killed 85 percent or more of the root stalks of sweetgum. Winter fires did not kill appreciable numbers of root stalks but did top-kill most sweetgum 2 inches (5 cm) or less d.b.h. [11].
Federal Status
None
Other Status
No entry.
Importance to Wildlife and Livestock
Sweetgum has moderate value as a winter browse [5]. In the Oconee National Forest of Georgia, sweetgum was lightly to moderately browsed by white-tailed deer during the fall and winter [19]. The seeds are eaten by birds, squirrels, and chipmunks [33].
Palatability and Nutritional Value
Sweetgum is relatively high in protein and caloric content. Mean nutrient values for sweetgum on unburned plots on the Siecke State Forest, Texas, varied seasonally as follows [27]:
| Season | Protein | Fat | Fiber | N-free extract | Ash | Phosphorus | Calcium |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Spring | 10.76 | 2.78 | 9.08 | 58.49 | 3.84 | 6.13 | 0.63 |
| Summer | 7.00 | 2.78 | 12.09 | 59.39 | 3.73 | 0.07 | 0.86 |
| Fall | 5.74 | 3.09 | 11.08 | 59.72 | 5.33 | 0.06 | 1.28 |
| Winter | 4.42 | 2.51 | 20.23 | 54.64 | 3.21 | 0.06 | 1.70 |
Cover Value
Sweetgum snags are used as breeding sites for a variety of birds and mammals [13].
Value for Rehabilitation or Restoration of Disturbed Sites
Sweetgum stem cuttings have been successfully planted for streambank protection and reclamation of sites disturbed by coal strip mining [29,46].
Sweetgum growth and survival was good when planted on favorable sites but decreased when seedlings were planted concurrently with ground cover or in previously established cover of grasses and legumes on mined sites in southeastern Indiana [3,8].
Other Uses
Medicinally, sweetgum is known as "copalm balsam" and the resinous gum is used extensively in Mexico and Europe as a substitute for storax. Various ointments and syrups are prepared from the resinous gum and are used in the treatment of dysentery and diarrhea. The gum is sometimes chewed by children, and it is also used as a perfuming agent in soap [45].
Sweetgum with fall foliage, Tennessee.
The beautiful red and yellow color variations of sweetgum's autumn foliage make it highly prized as an ornamental [33,45].
Sweetgum is primarily used for lumber, veneer, and plywood. The lumber is used to make boxes, crates, furniture, interior trim, and millwork. The veneer is used primarily for crates, baskets, and interior woodwork. Sweetgum is also used for crossties and fuel, and small amounts go into fencing, excelsior, and pulpwood [37,42].
Other Management Considerations
Sweetgum's ability to sprout quickly and persistently makes it one of the most serious competitors of pine seedlings in southeastern forests. Silvicultural practices have called for the control of sweetgum in areas where it competes heavily with pine seedlings [49]. Basal applications of Garlon 4 top-killed 81 percent of 2 inch (5 cm) d.b.h or smaller stems [35,36].
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)
- FRES12 Longleaf - slash pine
- FRES13 Loblolly - shortleaf pine
- FRES14 Oak - pine
- FRES15 Oak - hickory
- FRES16 Oak - gum - cypress
BLM Physiographic Regions (Bernard and Brown 1977)
- No entry.
Kuchler Plant Associations (Kuchler 1964)
- K097 Southeastern spruce - fir forest
- K100 Oak - hickory forest
- K102 Beech - maple forest
- K103 Mixed mesophytic forest
- K104 Appalachian oak forest
SAF Cover Types (Eyre 1980)
- 44 Chestnut oak
- 51 White pine - chestnut oak
- 52 White oak - black oak - northern red oak
- 57 Yellow-poplar
- 61 River birch - sycamore
- 62 Silver maple - American elm
- 64 Sassafras - persimmon
- 65 Pin oak - sweetgum
- 70 Longleaf pine
- 74 Cabbage palmetto
- 75 Shortleaf pine
- 76 Shortleaf pine - oak
- 78 Virginia pine - oak
- 79 Virginia pine
- 80 Loblolly pine - shortleaf pine
- 81 Loblolly pine
- 82 Loblolly pine - hardwood
- 83 Longleaf pine - slash pine
- 84 Slash pine
- 87 Sweetgum - yellow-poplar
- 88 Willow oak - water oak - diamondleaf oak
- 89 Live oak
- 91 Swamp chestnut - oak - cherrybark oak
- 92 Sweetgum - willow oak
- 93 Sugarberry - American elm - green ash
- 94 Sycamore - sweetgum - American elm
- 96 Overcup oak - water hickory
- 98 Pond pine
- 102 Baldcypress - tupelo
- 103 Water tupelo - swamp tupelo
- 104 Sweetbay - swamp tupelo - redbay
- 110 Black oak
SRM Rangeland Cover Types (Shiflet 1994)
- No entry.
1. Abernethy, Y.; Turner, R. E. 1987. US forested wetlands: 1940-1980: Field-data surveys document changes and can guide national resource management. BioScience. 37(10): 721-727. [10575]
2. Allen, James A.; Kennedy, Harvey E., Jr. 1989. Bottomland hardwood reforestation in the lower Mississippi Valley. Slidell, LA: U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, National Wetlands Research Center; Stoneville, MS: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Forest Experimental Station. 28 p. [15293]
3. Andersen, C. P.; Bussler, B. H.; Chaney, W. R.; [and others]. 1989. Concurrent establishment of ground cover and hardwood trees on reclaimed mined land and unmined reference sites. Forest Ecology and Management. 28: 81-99. [10920]
4. Belcher, Earl W., Jr.; Hitt, Robert G. 1965. Eastern Tree Seed Laboratory: 12th annual report, fiscal year 1965. Macon, GA: Eastern Tree Seed Laboratory. 66 p. In cooperation with: Region 8 and the Southeastern Forest Experiment Station, U.S. Forest Service; Georgia Forestry Commission and Georgia Forest Research Council. [6522]
5. Blair, Robert M.; Short, Henry L.; Epps, E. A., Jr. 1977. Seasonal nutrient yield and digestibility of deer forage from a young pine plantation. Journal of Wildlife Management. 41(4): 667-676. [16963]
6. Bonner, F. T. 1974. Liquidambar styraciflua L. sweetgum. 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: 505-507. [7695]
7. Borthwick, H. A. 1957. Light effects on tree growth and seed germination. A symposium on forest tree physiology; 1957 June 13-14; Wooster, OH. In: The Ohio Journal of Science; 57(6): 357-364. [10162]
8. Brothers, Timothy S. 1988. Indiana surface-mine forests: historical development and composition of a human-created vegetation complex. Southeastern Geographer. 28(1): 19-33. [8787]
9. Brown, Arthur A.; Davis, Kenneth P. 1973. Forest fire control and use. 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill. 686 p. [15993]
10. Carter, Katherine K.; Snow, Albert G., Jr. 1990. Pinus virginiana Mill. Virginia pine. In: Burns, Russell M.; Honkala, Barbara H., technical coordinators. Silvics of North America. Volume 1. Conifers. Agric. Handb. 654. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service: 513-519. [13411]
11. Chen, Ming-Yih; Hodgkins, Earl J.; Watson, W. J. 1975. Prescribed burning for improving pine production and wildlife habitat in the hilly coastal plain of Alabama. Bull. No. 473. Auburn, AL: Auburn University Agricultural Experiment Station. 19 p. [9909]
12. Clatterbuck, Wayne K. 1989. Even-aged mixtures of cherrybark oak and loblolly pine in southwestern Arkansas. In: Waldrop, Thomas A., ed. Proceedings of pine-hardwood mixtures: a symposium on management and ecology of the type; 1989 April 18-19; Atlanta, GA. Gen. Tech. Rep. SE-58. Asheville, SC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southeastern Forest Experiment Station: 123-127. [10268]
13. Dickson, James G.; Conner, Richard N.; Williamson, J. Howard. 1983. Snag retention increases bird use of a clear-cut. Journal of Wildlife Management. 47(3): 799-804. [13855]
14. Duncan, Wilbur H.; Duncan, Marion B. 1987. The Smithsonian guide to seaside plants of the Gulf and Atlantic Coasts from Louisiana to Massachusetts, exclusive of lower peninsular Florida. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press. 409 p. [12906]
15. Eyre, F. H., ed. 1980. Forest cover types of the United States and Canada. Washington, DC: Society of American Foresters. 148 p. [905]
16. Fernald, Merritt Lyndon. 1950. Gray's manual of botany. [Corrections supplied by R. C. Rollins]. Portland, OR: Dioscorides Press. 1632 p. (Dudley, Theodore R., gen. ed.; Biosystematics, Floristic & Phylogeny Series; vol. 2). [14935]
17. 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]
18. Godfrey, Robert K. 1988. Trees, shrubs, and woody vines of northern Florida and adjacent Georgia and Alabama. Athens, GA: The University of Georgia Press. 734 p. [10239]
19. Harlow, Richard F.; Shrauder, Paul A.; Seehorn, Monte E. 1975. Deer browse resources of the Oconee National Forest. Res. Pap. SE-137. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southeastern Forest Experiment Station. 16 p. [14602]
20. Hartnett, David C.; Krofta, Douglas M. 1989. Fifty-five years of post-fire succession in a southern mixed hardwood forest. Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club. 116(2): 107-113. [9153]
21. Hodgkins, Earl J. 1958. Effects of fire on undergrowth vegetation in upland southern pine forests. Ecology. 39(1): 36-46. [7632]
22. Hunt, Ron; Cleveland, Glenn. 1978. Cultural treatments affect growth, volume, and survival of sweetgum, sycamore, and loblolly pine. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry. 2(2): 55-59. [10633]
23. Kaufert, F. H. 1933. Fire and decay injury in the Southern bottomland hardwoods. Journal of Forestry. 31: 64-67. [2694]
24. Kormanik, Paul P. 1990. Liquidambar styraciflua L. sweetgum. In: Burns, Russell M.; Honkala, Barbara H., technical coordinators. Silvics of North America. Vol. 2. Hardwoods. Agric. Handb. 654. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service: 400-405. [17401]
25. Kormanik, P. P.; Ruehle, J. L. 1987. Lateral root development may define nursery seedling quality. In: Phillips, Douglas R., compiler. Proceedings. 4th biennial southern silvicultural research conference; 1986 November 4-6; Atlanta, GA. Gen. Tech. Rep. SE-42. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southeastern Forest Experiment Station: 225-229. [4199]
26. 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]
27. Lay, Daniel W. 1957. Browse quality and the effects of prescribed burning in southern pine forests. Journal of Forestry. 55: 342-347. [7633]
28. Lea, Russ; Frederick, D. J. 1990. Bottomland hardwood restoration in the southeastern United States. 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: 292-300. [14706]
29. Limstrom, G. A.; Merz, R. W. 1949. Rehabilitation of lands stripped for coal in Ohio. Tech. Pap. No. 113. Columbus, OH: The Ohio Reclamation Association. 41 p. In cooperation with: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Central States Forest Experiment Station. [4427]
30. Little, Elbert L., Jr. 1979. Checklist of United States trees (native and naturalized). Agric. Handb. 541. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 375 p. [2952]
31. Lotti, Thomas; Klawitter, Ralph A.; LeGrande, W. P. 1960. Prescribed burning for understory control in loblolly pine stands of the coastal plain. Station Pap. No. 116. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southeastern Forest Experiment Station. 19 p. [15417]
32. 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]
33. Martin, Alexander C.; Zim, Herbert S.; Nelson, Arnold L. 1951. American wildlife and plants. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc. 500 p. [4021]
34. McGarity, R. W. 1979. Young sweetgum responds to early merchantable thinning. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry. 3(4): 157-160. [10617]
35. McLemore, B. F.; Cain, M. D. 1988. A test of basal sprays for controlling hardwood brush and trees. In: Environmental legislation and its effect on weed science: Proceedings, 41st annual meeting Southern Weed Science Soc; 1988 January 18-20; Tulsa, OK. Volume 41. [Place of publication unknown]. [Publisher unknown]. 180-186. [12154]
36. Miller, James H. 1990. Streamline basal application of herbicide for small-stem hardwood control. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry. 14(4): 161-165. [13538]
37. 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]
38. Paton, Robert R.; Secrest, Edmund; Ezri, Harold A. 1944. Ohio forest plantings. Bull. 647. Wooster, OH: Ohio Agricultural Experiment Station. 77 p. [6974]
39. Powell, Susan W.; Day, Frank P., Jr. 1991. Root production in four communities in the Great Dismal Swamp. American Journal of Botany. 78(2): 288-297. [14595]
40. Raunkiaer, C. 1934. The life forms of plants and statistical plant geography. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 632 p. [2843]
41. Riebold, R. J. 1955. Summer burns for hardwoods control in loblolly pine. Fire Control Notes. 16(1): 34-35. [11602]
42. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 1956. Wood...colors and kinds. Agric. Handb. 101. Washington, DC. 36 p. [16294]
43. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1982. National list of scientific plant names. Vol. 1. List of plant names. SCS-TP-159. Washington, DC. 416 p. [11573]
44. Van Dersal, William R. 1938. Native woody plants of the United States, their erosion-control and wildlife values. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture. 362 p. [4240]
45. Vines, Robert A. 1960. Trees, shrubs, and woody vines of the Southwest. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press. 1104 p. [7707]
46. Vogel, Willis G. 1981. A guide for revegetating coal minespoils 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. [15577]
47. Waldrop, Thomas A.; Lloyd, F. Thomas. 1991. Forty years of prescribed burning on the Santee fire plots: effects on overstory and midstory vegetation. In: Nodvin, Stephen C.; Waldrop, Thomas A., eds. Fire and the environment: ecological and cultural perspectives: Proceedings of an international symposium; 1990 March 20-24; Knoxville, TN. Gen. Tech. Rep. SE-69. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southeastern Forest Experiment Station: 45-50. [16632]
48. Waldrop, Thomas A.; Van Lear, David H.; Lloyd, F. Thomas; Harms, William R. 1987. Long-term studies of prescribed burning in loblolly pine forests of the Southeastern Coastal Plain. Gen. Tech. Rep. SE-45. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southeastern Forest Experiment Station. 23 p. [11596]
49. Wenger, Karl F. 1953. The sprouting of sweetgum in relation to season of cutting and carbohydrate content. Plant Physiology. 28: 35-49. [13819]
50. St. John, Harold. 1973. List and summary of the flowering plants in the Hawaiian islands. Hong Kong: Cathay Press Limited. 519 p. [25354]