{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.018733850129198967, 'fraction_numerical': 0.014857881136950904, 'mean_word_length': 5.027237354085603, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Growth of Longleaf and Loblolly Pine Planted on South Carolina Sandhill Sites

Performance of longleaf (Pinus palustris Mill.) and loblolly pine (P. taeda L.) were compared 15–19 years after outplanting on 10 different sites in the sandhills of South Carolina. The study was established from 1988 to 1992 with bareroot seedlings artificially inoculated with Pisolithus tinctorius (Pt) or naturally inoculated with mycorrhizae in the nursery. A containerized longleaf pine treatment with and without Pt inoculation was added to two sites in 1992. Effects of the Pt nursery treatment were mixed, with a decrease in survival of bareroot longleaf pine on two sites and an increase in survival on another site. The containerized longleaf pine treatment substantially increased survival, which led to greater volume compared with bareroot longleaf pine. Loblolly pine yielded more volume than longleaf pine on all sites but one, where survival was negatively affected by fire. Depth of sandy surface horizon affected mean annual height growth of both loblolly and longleaf pine. Height growth per year decreased with an increase in sand depth for both species. Multiple regression analysis of volume growth (ft 3 /ac per year) for both species indicated a strong relationship to depth of sandy soil and survival. After 15–19 years, loblolly pine has been more productive than longleaf pine, although longleaf pine productivity may be equal to or greater than that of loblolly pine on the soils with the deepest sandy surface layers over longer rotations.