color w number of images - usda · this report, is a description of vo.potation at the test area 1...
TRANSCRIPT
Item ID Number 19
Author Kaosingha, Amnuay
Corporate Author
RBpOrt/ArtiClB TitlB Vegetation Analysis of Pran Buri Defoliation Test Area I, 66-007
Journal/Book Title
Year 1966
Month/Day January
Color w
Number of Images 77
DeSCrlptOD NOtOS ln English and Thai; no pages 51-54; includes as addenda excerpts from otherreports (the source for the last 4 pages is unknown), apparently inserted by AlvinYoung
Monday, November 13, 2000 Page 19 of 20
Kaosingha, A.,1966
Vegetation Analysis! of Pran BuriDefoliant Test Area I
AD 629 667 £- <, f.ASSIFIED
Defense Documentation CenterDefense Logistics Agency
Cameron Station • Alexandria, Virginia
IM^*A vft-.
I , T. U>..:rr.
UNCLASSIFIED
{ - %?«,"• vff.'-.i'S-i
•?•£**>&%&&
IiJi•*$.;*-»,
F,
• "i
%
•-!!.;
;>
s-'-s^ |
1.0 " ' - ^ ^J
( 1 4 r • t U1 .==
. ... t ' , 1 . —- - ! ' ". \ . \J
I 1 _ =ES^H
I.Z5 ||| 1.4 lliiii.s_ — -. Iti 1,1,1
*^*&*£j&*-t*ia£L>: ^iv,vifcia, s*£&*^^~*J&.j&iit3&^**&te^#i^''^^^
CO•• \
L-/ •(
<a 11VEGETATION ANALYSIS OF THE PRAN BURI
DEFOLIATION VEST AREA 1
66-GQ7
<U
JOINT THAI - U.S.
MILITARY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CENTER
BANGKOK, THAILAND
ABSTRACT
The vegetation of the defoliation test site 1 at Pran Buri wasdescribed and inventoried so that data would be available for preciseevaluation of the effects of defoliant spraying. The site is in a Dry orSemi-evergreen forest. Vegetation was divided into categories accordingto physiologic characteristics: dominant species, intermediate species,shrubs and climbers, and ground cover. Of the 164 species found in thearea, 46 were dominant, 35 were intermediate, 64 were shrubs andclimbers, and 19 were ground cover. All species belonged to 117 generafrom 52 families. Formation percentage for each category was deter-mined by counting stems of each species found in a 30-ft strip 530 feetalong the camera trails in each of 83 test plots. The formation percen-tages were found to be 17 percent for dominant, 75 percent intermediate,and 8 percent for shrubs and climbers. Ground cover was excludedfrom the stem count, as it would be a virtually impossible task on thatscale of test areas and would probably contribute little to the evaluation.The formation percentages according to phenology were found to be 16percent deciduous, 82 percent evergreen, arid 2 percent uncertain.
t i • t i « » t
iM^:%lflin^'<;fl}ja?rv^njrm iJj: i JJUua 'Df l ' jmj l dTLinvrTl u lu U" -v, - ' '
Ifiu j ID nuu a: fi'"i 5 i "n, ji ivj v i n u i i im mi ja -o vfif .au n i jl ij 5 uu ivhl vd uI I i » i
'. » " »
(dry or semi evergreen forest)' * *
uDUV1HU>3 (dominant species) fiuluvii? I J QliUfcfitt/l U^UWf.e^ (intermediate species
^ IsllI U11 (shrubs and climbers) U ^ > JllSVl L J n f i a i l f i U (ground cover)
»bsr ^uf) luvmvnnvo? t ?* *
u1u'!fuv)f.3>J a>e• • • •
W IJUfl V'"iinil<5llft 'BB<3?luiUVi>JttiJfi («b* species) UBtl I Ur u4 r - *
f i f l f l (genera) "ZKJJ'l^in £.a 1-3Pi (family) I f t M l I u'dl lUUf)
,mo ' ?1 till «<no /J*i f l1U?i ' j ' i l J l i1 / i 'aa^^Q-JVn-n. . l l lVilBn"l3 OIU J l J (camera trail)
* * , \ * .u i ) a > 3 J
« «" ^ - t# i.. , ' '
* * * "** n * +, * t if <T
* * ' • * bf*' " ' ' - - • » • • 'llnPiaJJflll V l ^ U l V j T I *\
ti i / 5u^ iv!ani5 j j r• « i I -j
• " i n v m a V i l u ua: J i t uiviVjuaVilu L ' j n n n T i i i J u i J j :
(deciduous) »b t l J P J m i i f . I U U L J K i n w l j JU9f 11) (evergreen). * * <? « , * « • , ' '
u a r a n a I IJB
Office of Environmental Research
'VEGETATION ANALYSISof
PRAN BUP.I DEFOLIATION TEST AREA 1
by
.Amnuay Kaosinghaand
JohnW. Kelley, J r . , Capt. , USA
66-007
,Dr. R. D. Holbrook Manob SuriyaDirector Air Vice-MarshalOSD/ARPA R&D Field Unit Commanding General, MRDC
January 1966
Joint Thai-U.S.Military Research and Development Center
Bangkok, Thailand
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction 1
Plot Layout 1
General Description of the Area and Vegetation 3
Distribution of Species--Characteristics and Variations 3
Analysis of Vegetation at Test Site 1 4
Categories of Species 5
Phenology (Seasonal Growth) 6
Identifying All Species in Test Area 7
Procedures in Inventory of 83 Sample Plots 7
Tabulation of Vegetation Formation Percentage $
Thai Translation 9
Distribution List 51
DD Form 1473 55
win9
10• 1 1 **
"\ •ifc'jwuviihuas/jqflw'znfi H* * <
: •viuriia>39iiilxiii^r pimjufinfTN 12'
.iJv! • 14
15• » t
• n u l u d y s i n v i c j n V i l u i t a s J j r iny i l
u uu
19*:j 20
Vll
LIST OF FIGURES
Plot Layout 2
Photographs of Vegetation 21-26
Table 1 List of Species 27-33
Table 2 Vegetation Formation, Test Area 1 34
Tables 3-13 Vegetation Formation by Plot 35-45
Table 14 Data Summary 46-49
Table 15 Summary of Formation and Phenology 50
viu
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors are grateful to the following people for theirassistance and encouragement:
Lt. Col. W. R. Scheible
Capt. Sonchai Chanhiran, RTN
Dr. R. A. Darrow
Dr. G. B. Truchelut
Lt. W. M. Wax
Mr. Tern Smitinand
Mr. Chamlong Pengklai
Mrs. Barbara Kriz• i i » » » i
u i^uu' i iQi QiiPiflwavnirjlfA ^?niji^nu i viaiuias rmfiimaui! fT^'JT iiiuiu« t V »
ai. B T J .
*• «•«,f l J . B I T . 19. m i l l
f i T . '*. iJ. vi : iisaavi
. i oxi. mn-3
*U1U
my
U1>3 U1111J1
IX
INTRODUCTION
This report, is a description of vo.potation at the test area 1 atPran Buri, Thailand, which was one of the two areas selected by theCrops Division of Fort Detrick for thy testing of defoliants (ARPAOrder No. 423), To the Environmental Research Office of theJoint ThaJ-U. S. Military Research and Development Center fellthe task of making a vegetation inventory, as the effects of variousdefoliants on the various species were; to be studied by Fort Detrick.This report concerns only the species found and the forest classi-fication; Fort Detrick will use this information in their report oneffects of the defoliants used. However, this report will also be ofinterest as a study of a Dry or Semi -fvt 'rgreer. forest, one of the12 forest types found in Thailand.
PLOT LAYOUT
As seen in Fig. 1 (page 2), 1.2 parallel, east-west lanes weremade, from which north-south plot boundaries were demarcated and120 possible defoliant treatment plots formed.
The inset in Fig. 1 is an enlargement of one cf the sample plotsin which an inventory was made. Into each sample plot used in theinventory was cut a 1, 000 i f . long trail to the six camera stationsestablished for ust. later when evaluating the defoliant effects. Aninventory was made of all vegetation w.:th:n a 5 m strip on each side ofthe camera t^ail for a distance of abou', 530 ft along the trail; thearea inventoried is marked with broke" ijnos in the inset, Fig. 1.
Of the possible 120 plots, 83 wf. r t - inventoried. Into each plotwas cut a trail of the same length and configuration as the one shownin the inset. The six amera stations along each trail were establishedfor use by Fort Detrick when assessing effects of defoliants.
For the vegetation survey, all vegetation was examined in asvvr.th extending 5 m on both sides of the trail, 5 m before the firststation, and 5 m after the sixth station. Ground cover was listedbut not counted. As approximately 1,600 m of area in each of 83plots were inspected, all vegetation, other than ground cover was ex-amined in about 2 percent of the test area.
1
DEFOLIATION TEST AREA IPLOT LAYOUT
jj_ --Initial vegetaticsample plots
All vegetation ex-amined in area
[ marked by brokenlines
-Camera station
Camera t ra i l
GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE AREA AND VEGETATION
Pran Buri is about 260 km southx est of Bangkok. Test area 1 atPran Buri is in a broad valley bordered on the west and partially on theeast by precipitous mountain ranges, which rise 300 to 1, 500 ft abovethe valley. The test area is about 1'mi long and 3 mi wide and includesabout 1,400 acres.
The forest is a secondary Dry or Semi-evergreen forest. Small-to medium-sized trees form a thick canopy,, and vines make the canopystill thicker. Medium-sized trees, which are sparse, are mostlydeciduous and form an upper, or dominant, story 13 to 25 m high. Anabundance of small, evergreen trees forms a continuous lower or inter-mediate story 5 to 12 m high. Undergrowth is dense in places and con-sists of small shrubs, saplings, and vines. Ground cover consists ofsmall plants, such as grasses, zingiberads, ferns, herbs, and seedlings.
DISTRIBUTION OF SPECIES--CHARACTERISTICS AND VARIATIONS
As evident in Tables 3 through 13 (pages 35-45), Streblus zeylanica*was the species most commonly found in the 83 sample plots, making upslightly more than 33 percent of the stems examined, while Cliestanthusheterophylus was second most prevalent, being slightly less than 30 per-cent of stems examined. However, the percentages of stems of thesetwo species varied considerably from lane to lane. Streblus zeylanicaranks first in all lanes except lane XJ, where it is second to Cliestanthusheterophyllus; the incidence of Streblus zeylanica varied between 42percent in lane VII and 28 percent in lane XI. Cliestanthus heterophylluswas the second most prevalent species among the specimens examinedbut varied between 32 percent in lane VII and 11 percent in lane I. •
There is a considerable difference in percentage of occurrencebetween the two most prevalent species and the third most prevalentspecies, Memecylon ovatum, which comprises about 5 percent ^i thevegetation examined.
Note: Thai common names are given in table on page 27.
Afzelia xylocarpa (2)* and Acionychia pedunculata (118) werealways found along streams.
In an old clearing in lane I, Gelonium multiflorum (107), Meliaazedarach (62), Croton oblongifolius (52), and Crataeva religiosa (147)were found.
Common species in open areas are Eupatorium odoratum (53),Imperata cylindrica U63), Lantana camara (136), Abut:lon mdicum(137), Coccinia indica (151), Passiflora foetida (152), Solanum sp.(153), and many kinds of grass and herbs.
Incidence of rare species is usually restricted to particularenvironments, and this was found true in the areas examined.Mitragyna brunonis (126), usually found in swampy areas, was foundin a swampy area along lane IV. In a moist place along lane III, thefollowing rare species were discovered: Caesarla grewiifolia (21),Koompassia excelsum (50), Acacia concinna (3), Parkia javanica (68),Syzygium cumingii (83), Streblus asper (80), Putranjiva roxburghii(111), Polyalthia suberosa (119), Dysoxylum sp. (148), Saccharumspontaneum (154), and Calamus sp.*-^
Of the rare species, not more than five stems of each werefound, except Mztragyna brununis (126), which was found in groups.See pages 21 to 26 for photographs of vegetation in test area I.
ANALYSIS OF VEGETATION AT TEST SITE I
The vegetation examined at defoliation test site 1, Pran Buriwas found to be about 82 percent evergreen, and therefore the site isclassified as a Dry or Semi-evergreen forest, typical of about one-third of the forested regions of Thailand. The deciduous speciesconstituted about 16 percent of the vegetation examined, with 2 percentlisted as doubtful.
* The numbers in parentheses-are the numbers given to thespecies in Table 1, beginning on page 27.
** A cane; not listed in Table 1.
A total of 145 dominant species, intermediate species, andspecies of shrubs were found in sporadic surveys throughout thegeneral area of rhe tost site, but only 97 species were representedamong the 18,706 trees, shrubs, and vines examined ard identifiedin the 83 sample plots. Table 15 (page 5(7) gives the numbers ofspecies in each oi the three categories of species tabulated, both inthe entire test area and the. portions of the 83 sample plots examined.The table also shows the percentage of vegetation in each of the threecategories.
CATEGORIES OF SPECIES
A list of the 164 species in the defoliation test area is given onTable 1 on pages 27 through 33. Based on the description of thevegetation given above, as well as on the characteristics of the species,the vegetation can be divided into fc r categories:
Dominant
Dominant species are trees with large crowns which, when thetree is mature, extend above the general level of the forest canopyand receive full sunlight from above and partial sunlight from thesides. Dominant species of this test area are usually medium-sizedand are rarely large. The canopy has an average height of 13 to 25 m.As shown in Table 1, there are 46 dominant species.
Intermediate
Intermediate species are trees with small crowns crowdedtogether at 5 to 12 m above the ground and forming the forest canopy.These trees receive some light from above, being shaded somewhatby the dominant species, but none from the sides. This class includesan abundance of small, but rarely medium-sized, trees. As shownin Table 1, there are 35 intermediate species.
Shrubs
Shrubs are defined as bushy or woody plants with several perma-nent stems rather than a single trunk; vines and other climbers nrealso considered shrubs in this inventory even though some of them
growing on dominant or intermediate species (see Nos. 4, 22, 45, 49,76, 88, and 133) climb high enough to form part of the canopy. Someof the species considered shrubs in this inventory grow low enoughto be considered ground cover (see Table 1, Nos. 1, 5, 15, 17, 19,27, 56, 129, 130, 136, 137). Other species of shrub are as tall asintermediate species. There were 64 species of shrubs discoveredin the defoliant test area.
Ground Cover
Low-growing plants --grasses, palms, herbs, and seedlings --were listed as ground cover but their stems were not counted, asthey are generally of little importance in military defoliation. Therewere 19 ground cover species excluding seedlings (see Table 1)*.
PHENOLOGY (Seasonal Growth)
Deciduous
Deciduous species are defined here as species that are withoutleaves for more than 30 days each year. During the dry season thisforest is quite dry, and most of the dominant trees shed their leaves.This takes place from. January through May, although in some yearsthe rainy season, which precedes the dry season, may end earlieror later than usual, causing the period of leaf fall to come earlieror later. Some small trees and shrubs also, such as species Nos.14, <*0, 69, 89, 91, and 105, shed the j r loaves during the dry season.There are 43 deciduous species in the defoliant test area.
Evergreen
Evergreens are defined here as those species which are withoutleaves no longer than 30 days each year. Generally, evergreensshed their leaves throughout the year, and when the old leaves fall,
Seven were considered as both shrubs or climbers andground cover.
new ones rapidly come out to replace them. The density of foliagedepends on the moisture of the season, there being a greater amountof foliage in the wet than in the dry season.
IDENTIFYING ALL SPECIES IN THE TEST AREA
To have a working list of species in the test area when exami-nation of the 83 sample plots began, an initial survey was made attest area 1. Samples of every kind of plant, except those of nosignificance in the deioliation project--such as, ferns, zingiberads,and orchids were collected in seven 10 x 100-m plots. These plotswere scattered over the test area:
2 sample plots in lane I2 sample plots in lane III2 sample plots in lane V1 sample plot in lane VII
See Fig. 1, page 2, for the locations of these seven plots. Later,during the inventory of the 83 sample plots, more species were found.
Specimens v/ere sent to Mr. Tern Smitinand at the Royal '" • •Forest / Department for identification; 164 species were noted intest area 1, only one of which remains unidentified.
PROCEDURES IN INVENTORY OF 83 SAMPLE PLOTS
As discussed above on page 1, species were identified 5 m oneither side of the trails for a distance of about 530 ft (see Fig. 1).The species numbers were painted on the trees or specimens weretagged to make assessment of the defoliants' effects easier for theFort Detrick researchers. Also, the phenology of each species wasrecorded, if known, so that in later evaluations seasonal effectswould not be mistaken for reactions to the defoliants.
In addition to the 10-m wide swath inventoried and markedalong each camera trail, each tree within 30 ft of the camera stations
was identified, marked, and located on a chavt. This informationwill be useful in evaluating vertical photographs taken from thecamera stations as part oi the defoliant evaluation.
TABULATION OF VEGETATION FORMATION PERCENTAGE
Species distributions in the 11 lanes are presented in Table 3through 13, pages 35 to 45. The species name is given if it repre-sents more than 1 percent of the vegetation in that lane. In Table 2,page 34, distribution data from all 11 lanes are summarized.
For these analyses the 19 species of ground cover were ex-cluded. While Table 1 includes the i9 species of ground cover andlists a total of 164 species found in the entire test area, the totalnumber of species to be found if ground cover is excluded is 145.However, the total r.umbe^ of species counted in the 83 sample plotswas 97, as 20 species found are to.» small to be counted and as the28 rare species were not found in the sample plots.
Table 14, page 46, lists by number (see Table 1) all 97 speciesfound in the 83 sample plots. The total numbers of stems countedin each of the 11 lanes are given at the right, while total numbers ofstems of each of the 97 species counted, are given at the bottom ofthe table. Also at the bottom, of the. table, numbers 1 through 17are used to arrange jn descending order the 17 most common speciesfound in the 83 p!.ots.
I * I
B'linaiJ? iwin TNU'TfrJ j s 'vTi j f i j i f in B U I uuuiJa^vif iae iJ i i i J fHuu/ l vminu*
Crop Division UVN Fort Detrick IfTlli
l ?u^n i J ' 5 fu f ,« jmf iaQj j
v i « v i
Fort Detrick If lf l nmufi'l^tn I PlJJVlvnl wl I) 111 J 'i^ (defoliant)
^vi^ti jua inBv!'Bii?i^: '2<ufi i iu>3 luunai') i^v-nri t < • *
THVn<! Fort Detrick It Ifll 'Sfil J f/lpTqfl U I B n f i l J Ui . * * * '
fii-.Bii B i i i > i l j n f i i niu ^ nuuiT^ uJui iunsul^luj iur' - *
YJLhfi lJUfH (dry or semi evergreen forest)
»fl 'GUfl M^llluil ir I V I f l l v i U .
* 1 ' ' • «*4 I t i »x ^
.-,'1. , < V ) o ('VI11"! (2 } .li.r-mKVl"K ( l a n e ) TH I f i f l f l I JlUimili'llinil•«« ' ' ' * * ' •
VUrifiYlinil -oa f £ f ; - 3 D U ' S B O y i ' N I V i a i l i l f l U D - J I Ull l l l l fH
j Q L (test p 'ot) ?>3 vr I «B 1; Ull I Ja^Vif . f i f l l ) l f iViO: ' .XJ*i »'ao II L ?H
< ri ^ * ^mvaan (inset) iii;"iiv,\i « iuunv./iitntui'c'.fn j l u a - i u D f i u B ^ u J a^I I I » 9 9 > t I
?n aii "Nil lien ^u^5-J I f i v h n i s f.'iT o ^ f i u l j j I n i . i ' JaofT')QD' - i 'Ovivi '"> .ni j f / i y o v i i f i am J a ^
J J V I 1 > 3 l f l l l ( t ra i l ) D ' lO »ooo,'Jfl U f < - '^i' ;1111tl1lJ J j (camera station)I ^ •) ' 9 «- 9
b iisni! n i ? "viutiti j u v i i ^ inni!_ • I I 9 « » 9
n *lumvr an (inset)' * a *
» » ' a ' ' *Tin lulu dm u J a - 3 TN i JuViu ' iuwcI&Ti i M i j C , ; r i i r u ? ' , ' J T U f i Q > ] n ' ; j
i ^ i i ii i f i a : i iL la> i fTf ivn^ ifi i i ( trail) i jp iTi i JL 'nLv,n *} rnuiarin 'J? -.v'tiyN i f ? D O nil
I I » f i - ^ ' C * " 9 9 1
fT>3 1*211 VHUifKi'l 'K'UmY, lap , (inset) Vil ^ U'.Uli I Ju I i.UVl 1 -3 f/lllfl) I iVllilVlFort Detrick9 ^ » •* I I I
i •Jill J i J j s i u u u t « n ' i j l i J : L i L * ! f i / 5 u & i D f i i I ' . ' a t fn i i fn j D I U J
(camera station) n i - ' v l D R U b i',0'ilit t » »
fin fiu i5:rv"r :vv?ivnsi :^:>3i ' i ;ni i i ' !L ' J t u u r n « U J ? , T iu<t, 1 , .* » , ^ «
J i i » ? ; 5 r.'^yf'uyj'a' ' *' r, * '
den II 1J fl <3 li'll U r ; V i t '-I Jkl -1 i.'l? 0 v' I U'.,l!V1 d T ' ' U l t U »boo* ' ^ <f * '
'n?: vi'il u r iuvi jf - ; u u n " ; j r/'.: i ^ v s n ? : vi'i u i u v i j r u i w a i in
10
I » * »
imNvh i 1J•?!'fj >; •/!uvi Jnu a: .'<^iiw"•<;
<j ivu n jU 1I I I « I
t#,'j?i
nta « l^ia i. * •' <4 4 « t* I
» - ' -. •
(dry or sem; - evergreen) V? I .
t n n i• » *
wu L vi » i i
uu i
II a = I 'J
S I f i V m f l f l l l J (deciduous)v
(dominant) <D>3JJ?i /) IJJf. >3 J - V.O 1-J
yiulu 'BKif i t t » n ^ i ) V i D U B u i ' P,
U f l f i l l l (evergreen) 5 I V ' j I J Q U U B f ) £ t '
•• <«JJ U1
l! (saplings)t
VlllS i a n
(ferns)
(undergrowth) ^ U B U V I U I U U U I U U V l U E U 1 ih =
(intermediate)
(shrubs)
(vines) v ^ V l J n P i a ] J f 1 U (ground cover)i t
vnnvilp (grasses) v n m i U L 7 'J (zingiberads)
' -, 'an (herbs) U f l S vnn na*l IU (seedlings)
11
i i t ^ ^ i 9 i
f N M L l J inf]1^ L U f I 0 . ! "MM <n ^ *« ( U U 1 " ) 'i I f lUli t tU Vlli 1U ( StreblusH • » I ' I I I
zeylanica) I LJUfiu iuvi i j l J 'mvif.rTl UUlJa^fna t l 'H ^»n U L l f l v l TKJJXJ in m 1
fl ' u in= l f»^ l l f1v3(CUes tan ' , .us hetero-
* * * *phyilus) i j u n n i u
' « # " * * • * • ' * • ^ •t u i ^ U n f ! uls: i-aiifi-at ^ ?i-u 1 f, B >j ? uri ui f in fi i >i nu •« n nil e -j vi T O V I U J ^ anna
1 * 1 * ' * 'f l U ^ B U ^ U I H (S-;rebius zeylanica) JJJJ in I• i i i i a '
vi «« T ^ n n u " i L u u e \ n n j v l f , ? j > 3 j
(Cliestanthus heterophyllus) I IJB J i 'DUfl 'Btl^f lU' i iaU MU1U (Streblus
J « ^ ' J ' ^zeylanica) i i v l M f l f l <^3 I lie 3 l lJUfl i UTcH VII <J M d II 9 5 fl'l M fl fi a^ l U
1 j * ' ^ * ^L U t D a ' J V 1 1 > 3 V l »« l U n s l f l x J l l f X I (CUestanchus heterophyllusjjjJJ^.n I Ou't
f
VI ri l iarf l ' l f i f l *» H J B T t ^ I V l f l 1 TiU B >3 Ml 0 W »
, ^ - „ • ^ -^j j?mii i i f infn>ir i 'mj in7s vni>i i i J a j m^?i'BB^fiiiluviijknnr.B'rd' 'umju j n nil» » i — i *
f l l l l l iWJJJJ in lUUVUfTlJVl iS l i J f t ' t j f l U ^ a e v ) (Memecylon ovatum)if 9 9 •
i i i3Ufi < Ba>iV' iu ' i i i f i i i l i Jvf>Jv^f i i vt I 1 9 1
(Af7.c:ja xylocarpa 2) llfl: f ) U n i = I T j a v i P O l j ( Acronychidj i *
pedunculata 1J8) I
: in", {old clearing) 1 1111 S 4 VII ^ V) «
multiflorum 107) l^ 'dU (Melia azedarach 62)
(Crcton oblonii'.iolius 52) l i a r f i U \ j n (C rataeva religiosa 147).i i i » f » i
^ UWvTla^ i rV ' J V J ^ ' c ; T U J J i n l f l l i n f l 1 U UiB (Eupatorium odoratum 53)
l (Imperaca cylindrlca 163) U n i 0 5 ao(Lantana carr-ara J 3 6 ) l u - J U l ' J
12
(.Abutilon indicum 137) fTlfl>l (Coccinia indica 151)
(Passiflora foetida 152) JJS 111QCJ (Solanum sp. 153)
-s * « -, i «*•*
» T i J J l J n f ) n v l l l J < D l l f l V l J J U Q U V < I Q V ! l l J i n ( r a r e species) iTms Tl'UVin
ivnuu
i i i iO «<*
UYIVI" . ,
tragyna brunonisi i » i
llIU ftQ n J T l ) (Casearia grewiifolia) f lUUI l i (Koompassia excelsum 50)i • •
(Acacia concinna 3) ns I V I T U - J (Parkia javanica 68) flUvnii i
(Syzygium cumingii 83) tSU (Streblus asper 80) JJS j»f*llr(Putranjiva roxburghii
111) Polyalthia subercsa (119) m ISQ (Dyscxylum sp. 148) W J (Saccharum
(Calamus sp,*)I • ^ » »
(rare species) 1 U M U VIII 1U^<BUf^la^3nulJJ1 M
spontaneum. 154)I 9 9 >
->mil
*»1U
I • I
l u n n u i nu
(Mitragyna brunonis 126)
v»in 21-26
13
"'1 , -if i lvuiua>ivim' . t i i ivi »
^
inni j G'I T TSfivilj/1 vm iJa-o vimtBiirr. i ^ fuu nvru ul n lu T ^ 1 uu L]?H v? »i
(evergreen) B U l l J S l J i m ei'a 11JQT ITu •* i ^(dry or semi-evergreen) V I U T B U f l• i * ' ' • ' * *
{fi "UllT = I YlPllYlL' ll I ' U ItUI'vl 0*1 VI i4 T*J^1Q >3 VJVIV1M t UULhv >3 V^fl JJPVi 111 d I : I fiVIU aVll U
(deciduous)^ •
I ' D V l f l l l l V l J I U U V l
tul VI ll l l a > 3 V l f l S B l l l J j r U 1 W »b uJa i lT IVl f l mjQn a
(intermediate)
^ •r i i i v i n L v . T v v i
(categories)
(dominant)
Uf lS W
fIVi I IQVl
•
I til (shrubs and vines)
n
(wvn 50 )
M^l Vivivimt llfl^
•
fivivfvi
14
9 1 9 9
I
f n j * N v • wvn 27-339 • 9 • » i i
u ^ r ^ ' jna 'nMWS'BQ>3fTu ' luv i i J : in r j < Lru{J iu i iov vr
• « I
(dominant)* • i
fi u 1 u V v,n n M uI •
l f l ^ 9 TV! PI I!
- l U f l J• • I
' * * * ' *"
'j w^r lyufiulunuir.l-jijiinivninn j j f t - i ' iui » » » i
M « JJflulill U^UTJBU STb
(intermediate)
t ' * ( « * * 'vm Liauutifi '[)ij riiil ' 'uv)Sev3iO'Ufi'uliJvii1 1 j
<S: - *!a l^* t 9
\XI t
uivnir anf iuluvi iJ i i
tan i iu
(shrubs)* * *
180 1 EiJVllUflU*
* * *W J lUQlff l «1
: via"iiifTL.iviTiv5^rij iv^u>3n' i f iu iI » 9 « •
cul u^uumu fi"
*in I* * I 9
j
u
1 9 9
• 9
9 • t
rtb, <=;«: uar ivnnijfiul uv
15
uI 1 » I I I • I
wijpiTUJt'.v iv'ifn.'fi'aljjvv.'nnvlij i ts i i i iQ^aulu 'Duvif ie^ uluvii: luu i l fH
I 9 I I
u (seedling) v ui i » « i
^«)
16
urJj: i f .viu;
'
n <r>0 run • • _ • • • . , . , , , ,
i uqMuuihu i iu inn<nsumu(H ua r f iu luV-nnnv l i J i• i •
(dominant) S lu'l Utp: UltVUrjaV'l U?^ ^r i Ju| ViJ T5 if! fill U H T I f l U'
vicjvjrnnjj I'.nui
I T S
k |«
(intermediate) U n r l j J V I l J (shrub) \ J - J J1JUf tj
, <sr0, b-s1, cirfJ, <?* na:• •
llUfl
<no
us: i a i 1 imi i^liTiul v iun^ r r j a B t n u i u v i - u w B i j
i i n i n l i iu iwflB ' j i i J 'U 'UQ'dniJ i -n" iu '2 j j '£u < LQ>3qfinia l u q n t i u ^ r j ji • * * » *
17
« *
jj l u u i J a v i Y i n f . e u
• I • I - 9 •
tin !m1 vm
V» « J " ^
ululin™ nu r n n i - ^ i u4 « I « I
(initial plot) ni: '
I I
1l lTJf l>JVl*l>JVl d JJlI l l « * I * I I » »
* •J -.•{[ l i l l lJfl>3frT B U I xl eicn l lTJfHllfn I f l Y I U f l U lu I
• • • IJJ ^ ^ ^
inu f lunuuviu
• * • i i i i 1 ^ 1* u iinr j j f iu luvi lx iQTi /vniu^BeiJ iuu>3yu>J '3^f i ivnuu.
18
1 * 1 * * i • i *f>j vi I fin -emu Tumi t,vim»a nlf iVnuun^t jua: I!TJ 'n in virtu's; 9 N
.•Zn<JVI"N I f l V l (trail) '£1<l«r s. l l l fU l U U l r ur Vl l^ ill -U1W
viv *)V
• I I * * 1^
Fort Detrick 1 Uf l l J ll JS UJUUf li ^ » » i ^ i
nil i iJau<uii iJa>3fn:j 'B: j j j T 3 i f i i i Q > 3 f i i u l i i u f i a = T i v i f i i i!iinijuaft1u
• * » I »
u a r m j I'auiiWiu ia ' f l \ jur 1ul^1<uunuv(i ivin ' i i>3 »0^ » i * f
Viil mo rtnmb
Eu i i i un i ? iii-
19
nn i-nif .n-U'jBT<f f
• i"SB 4 null/lull B >nn>3 (lane)
UfifNQt/l V f l U U V ) <n *
»• 1ifl<i• ^
35
1 * • f f ' ^1lif11T1>JW 2 VI HI 34' I J u n U f l J l J U f l I ' JBJ L ' D U f l Q x 3 ? l l J i : n B U ^ i n { B B v J V 1 1 > J 99 ^iB>3
* •(ground cover)
(ground cover)
•Bur.
• •
1 ing
(ground cover) mmiU ^S I UV1J I L ^ B f l u ^ l V1WU »«:
•* . •* ' 1 '4- 'w . ' O . V 4 4nn ^iuiu '3<ufi '2B>3fiu luvi I n u u ^ i u i u f . u i H eim u i ] a > J u u j J i w U ' j
(rare species) -1 • • ^ ,
3T i
Tin **t » l I • I
t » I
• • I
u s n < j t i J a j
20
JWM3
i -'V"r ,• ll \ • !* "•%*'-• ;' I • !
rtf^"^' . *w -"«a*i«f^^
i ^^ -^ ..-v^ -*£"*-Mt;.
Photo 1Showing the vegetation formation of defoli-ation area 1, which consists of an abundanceof small trees of two species- -St reblus zey-lanica (81) and C1 e is tanthus he te rophy 1 lus(90).
21
Ill 1mfS^^^^^^P^ff^.m
Photo 2Tree on the lef t is Diospyros sp. (34), oneof the dominant trees forming the uppercanopy, 13 to 25 m high.
22
Photo 3Tree on the left is Lagerstroemia floribunda(54), one of the dominant species; vine hang-ing on it is Ventilate calyculata (88), a com-mon vine of the area. Big tree on the rightis Diospyros sp. (34), one of the dominantspecies.
23
»JZaK&.'V' ™*. ;' i . a/- .-, ... - '•••ft «• ,
^^f^C::^^r^4^';
Pl.;>to 4Big t ree in the middle is L«igerstroemialoudonii ( 5 5 ) , one of the dominant treespecies of t h i s fores t . Many Streblus 7.ey-lanica (81) are also v is ib le .
24
Photo 5This photograph shows ground cover species.Big-leaved plant in foreground is Strobilan-thes sp. (130) , and next to it are Actiphilasiamensis {!), listed as both shrub and groundcover.
25
PllOt o O
Nl i t r agyna b runon i s (126 ) , one of the rarespecies, iound grouped around swampy areain lane IV .
26
Table 1
List of Plant Species Found in Test Area 1, Pran Burl
No. Botanical Name
1. Actiphila siamensis2. Afzelia xylocarpa3. Acacia concinna4. Tetrastigma sp.5. Aphania sp.6. Atalantia monophylla7. Atalant ia roxburghiana8. Acacia comosa9. Capparis tenera
10. Atalantia scandens1 1. Bambusa sp.12. Bauhinia bassacensis13. Salmalia insignia14. Cliestanthus f > p .
(2)*(3)(5)(6, 166)(8)(9)(10)( I D(13)(14)(16)(17)(18)(19)
Thai Name
si somma ka mongsorn poithaowan daenglam leingma now peema now peenarm hxienna rn nongrna now peepaisa laeng panngui pakadang hai
Typeof Plant** Category*** Phenology**** Remarks
STSCS
STSSSSBCTS
S-C-CDSS
S-GCISSSSISDS
DD---EEE-EEE
DDDD
rare
rare
rare
* These- numbers are those used when marking the vegetation at the site; they are not consecutive here because thecomplete Fort Detrick list includes species found at. test site 2. This list is of species at test site 1 only. TheFort Detrick numbers are given in the report because this report wil l be used by the Fort Detrick researchers intheir work on the defoliation project.
* T -- treeST -- small tree
S -- shrubC -- climberB -- bambooP -- palmG -- grass
* D — dominantI -- intermediateS -- shrub or climber
GC — ground cover
**** DD -- deciduousE -- evergreen
Phenology of some species,particularly shrubs and groundcover, omitted because unknownor uncertain.
Table 1 (Cont. )
No.
15.16.17.18.19.20.21.22.23.24.25.2o.27.28,29.30.31.32.33.
34.
35.36.37.38.39.
J O .41.42.
Botanical Name
Buxus w a l l i c h i a n a (20)Bauhinia bracteata ( 2 1 )Mezoneururn hymenocaspum ( 2 2 )Caesalpinia sappan ( 2 5 )Cappar is ; macropoda ( 2 4 )Cappar i s tho re l i i (25)Casearia grewiifol ia (26)Pachygone dasycarpa (28, 76)Cel t is sp . (29, U j )Cissus cf , d iscolor (30)Diospyros sp . ( 3 1 )Combretum quadrangulare (32)Croton cumingi i ( 33 )Hymer.opyramis brachiata (34)Grewia c las tos temoidcs ( 3 6 )D e r r i s scandcns ('<<>}Diospyros mollis ( ;>1)Diospyros caul i f lora (38)DLospyros curranii (39)
Diospyros sp. (40, U,)
E ry th r i na sp. ( 4 1 )Antheroporum pierrei (42)Diospyros castanea (43)Euphobia trigona (44)Ficus sp. (45)
Gardenia collinsae (46)Garuga pinnata (47)Bridel ia siamensis (48)
Thai Name
chong ram panka dai lingkc-ao mue waiphangka c h i c ki\a c h i c kk r u a y
ta lai khaodard t akua thaoman moosa kae naplaokra dook taekh a r < > i iuk k a l i n gt [;.•' r • v. .1 n pr l ongma k luadee meedam dong bai lek
(small leaf)dam dong bai yai
(big leaf)tong langka pi ki noktap taosalad daitrai (heart shape
leaf)khoy darnta kramma ka
Typeof Plant**
SCCSSSTCTCT
STSSTCT
STT
T
TT
TST
T
STTS
Category***
GCS-GC
SS
GCSDSISII
GCSD
S-GCDID
D
IDIID
IDS
Phenology**** Remarks
c r e e p 1 1-E_
EE rare_
Erare
EE rare-_
DD rarec r e e p i r
DDEE
E
DD rareEEE
DD
DDDD
..
Table 1 (Cont. )
(S)
No. Botanical Name
43. Mansonia gagei44. Grewia tomentosa45. Hiptage marginata46. Hoya obcordata47. Hydnocarpus ilicifolius48. Flacourtia rukam49. Jasminum sp.50. Koompassia excelsum51. Hymenodicthyon excelsum5Z. Croton oblongifolius53. Eupatorium odoratum54. Lagerstroemia floribunda55. Lagerstroemia loudonii56. Lepionurus ramentacea57. Tarenna longifolia58. Memecylon floribundum59. Manilkara hexandra60. Memecylon ovatum61. Micromelum hirsutum62. Melia azedarach63. Millettia leucantha64. Mitrephora winitii65. Glycosmis montana66. Niebuhria siamensis67. Olea maritlma68. Pakia javanica69. Phyllanthus sp. '70. Pterocarpus macrocarpus71. Rhaphis micrantha72. Combretum procursum73. Sterculia faetida
(49)(50)(51)(52)(53)(54)(55)(56)(57, U1Q)(58)(59)(60)(61)(62)(63)(64)(65)(66)(67)(69)(70)(71)(72)(73)(75)(77)(78)(79)(80)(81)(82)
Thai Name
chanpla
t ien ka moikabaotakobmali wanyuan pungu lokeplaosarb suata backsa laopak waen
plong khiru>kkadeplonghas sa kunlienkha chohmaha promkaewchangf inka riengpangpradoomark lingsa kae thaosam rong
Typeof Plant**
TST
C
TST
CTTSHTTSS
STT
STSTT
srs
STST
TST
TPCT
Category***
DIS
IISDDS
GCDDSS1DISIDISIIDIDSSD
Phenology****
DD--EEE.
DDDD
E_
DDDD
EEEEEEE
DDEE
DDE
DDDDDD
EE
DD
Remarks
rare
rare
rare
Table 1 (Cont. )
No. Botanical Name
74. Sapium insigne75. Sindora maritima76. Sphenodesma pentandra77. Spondias pinnata78. Melianthus suavis79. Burretiodendron siamensis80. Streblus asper81. Streblus zeylanica82. Tiliacora triandra83. Syzygium cumingii84. Pterospermum ILttorale85. Vitex pinnata86. Tetrameles nudiflora87. Terminalia pierrei88. Ventilago calyculata89. Vitex quinata90. Cleistanthus heterophyllus91. Zizyphus oenoplia92. Ficus geniculata
93. Diospyros rhodocalyx94. Dalbergia nigrescens95. Terminalia tripteroides96. Mitrephora sp. (107, 149,97. Ficus altissima98. Holoptelea integrifolia99. Ficus maclellandii
100. Diospyros buxifolia101. Buchanania glabra102. Canangium latifolia103. Cyathostemma micrantha
Thai Name
(83) kled raet(84) make shy ta le(85) tarn ka moy(86) ma kok(87) pak waen(89) poh khao(90) khoy(91) khoy narm(92) thao chang(93) wa(94) hu kwang(95, 100) samo tin ped(95) ka pong(97) ta baek krai(98) thao wanlek(99) mak lek ma1', noi(101) ka dong daeng(102) leb yiew(103) trai
(long leaf stalk)(104) ta ko na(105, 127) cha nuan(106) ben170, U^) paya rak dam
(108) trai tong(109) ka chao(110) trai(111) lam bid(114) ma muang nok(120) sa kae saeng(121) nom rnaew
Typeof Plant**
TTCTTTT
. STCTTTTTCT
STST
STST
TTTTTT
STTS
Category***
DI
S-GCDDDII.SDDDDD
S-GCIISD
IIDDDDDDIIS
Phenology****
DDDD
EDDDDDD
EE_
EEE
DDDD
EDD
EDDDD
EE
DDE
DDDDDD
EEEE
Remarks
creepin
rare
rare
seedlinj
rare
rarerarerare
rarerare
Table 1 (Cont. )
No. Botanical Name
104. Artabotrys siamensis105. Drypetes sp.106. Euonymus cochinchinensis107. Gelonium multiflorum108. Casearia sp.109. Phyllanthus sp.110. Walsura trichostemon111. Putranjiva roxburghii112. Connarus cochinchinensis113. Mallotus dispar114. Euonymus carinatus115. Ehretia laevis116. Canthium nitidum1 1 7. Rinorea sp.118. Acronychia pedunculata119. Polyalthia suberosa120. Unknown121. Bridelia monoica122. Flueggea micrncarpa123. Mallotus sp.124. Ficus hispida125. Tarenna adangensis126. Mitragyna brunonis127. Canthium sp.128. Carissa chochinchinensis129. Scyphellandra pierrei130.. Strobilanthes sp.131. Premna sp.1 32. Ficus colosa133. Strychonos thorelii
(122)(123)(125)(126, U 1 3 )(132)(137)(138)(139)(140)(143)(144, U?)(145, U8)(146, U9)(147, U1 2)(148, U I 4 )(150)(151)(153)(154)(155)(156)(157)(158)(159)(161)(164)(165)(166)( 1 7 1 )(172)
Thai Name
ka dang nga pakhi raetka lum nokkhan tong paya bartkhai ta khedok tai baikad linma kam kaitab taeb
nok nornkomta kien nuka dook kaikra buang tuay
si fankang pla bai lek
ma dua plong
ka turnnarm tangnarm promkhoy yong
traicha em thao
Typeof Plant**
SSS
STSS
STTCS
STST
TS
STSTSSSSS
STSSSSSTC
Category***
SSSISSIDSSIIDS1SDSSSSSISS
S-GCGC
SDS
Phenology****
EDD
EEEEE
E-E
DDEEEEEEE-EE
DD-----
DDE
Remarks
rare
rarerare
rare
rare
rare
rare
Table 1 (Cont. )
No. Botanical Name
134. Rhaphidophora peepla (173)135. Premna sp. (174)136. Lantana camara • (175)137. Abutilon indicum ( 1 7 7 )138. Ficus curtipes (178)139. Capparis sepiaria (179)140. ZLzyphus cambodiana ( I S O )141. Mezoneurum sp. (181,142. Sterculia parvif lora (18Z)143. Albizzia procera (183)144. Capparis siamensis (184)145. Capparis micr.:.ntha (185)146. Tamarindus indica (187)147. Crataeva religiosa (191)148. Dysoxylum sp. (192)149. Flacourtia sp. (196)150. Sarcostemma brunonianum (201)151. Coccinia indica (202)152. Passiflora foetida (203)153. Solanum sp. (204)154. Saccharum spontaneum (203)155. Cynanchum lare (209)156. Streblus taxoides (216)157. Achyranthes sp. (1)158. Aglaonema sp. (4)159. Kaempheria sp. (142)160. Munronia humilis (163)161. Fimbristylis sp. (167)
194)
Thai Name
plu chang
pa ka krongphong phangtrai
ta krongfang lingpo kha nunkang
ma kharmkum bokta suata knob thai
tarn lungka tok rokma khua peepong
khoysawongbai sam siproh
Typeof Plant**
CSSSTSSSTTSSTTTSCCCSGCSHHHHG
Category** *
SS
GCGC
DSSSDDSSDDDSS
GCGC
SGCGC
SGCGCGCGCGC
Phenology****
E.--
DD_
--
DDDD
EE
DDDD
E-»-
----E----_
Remarks
rarerarerare
rarerare i
rarerarerarerare
creepingcreepingrare
creepingrare
*•<11
Table 1 (Cont. )
No. .Botanical Name
162. Digitaria sp.163. Imperata cylindrica164. Solaria sr>.
(168)(169)(199)
Thai Name
ya ka
Typeof Plant** Category*** Phenology**** Remarks
GGG
GCGCGC
Table 2
Vegetation Formati ^n of Test Area 1, Pran Buri(Data from 83 plots)
Botanical Name
Streblus zeylanicaCleistanthus heterophyllusMemecylon ovatum.Mansonia gageiEuphobia trigonaAntheroporum pierreiDiospyros caulifloraVentilago calyculataCeltis sp.Lagerstroemia floribundaMitrephora winitiiSphenodesma pentandraVitex quinataPhyllanthus sp.Diospyros sp.Atalantia monophyllaMillettia leucantha80 species, each lees than 1%
Category*Ft Detrick
No.** No. Percent
I11DIDT.A.
sIDISIIDT
D
819060433836328823546476896934663
9110166494442389829607185997840970
33. 122.05.04.53.72.72.71.91.71.61.61.21.21.21.21.21.012.5
Dominant 34 speciesIntermediate 29 speciesShrubs and climbers 34 species
97 species
16.7%74.8%
8.5%
* D - dominant; •. - intermediate; S - shrub or climber
** See Table 1
34
Table 3
Vegetation. Formation of Lane 1, Test Area 1, Pran Bun(Data from 8 plots)
Botanical Name
Streblus zeylanicaMemecylon ovatumCliestanthus heterophyllusEuphobia trigonaMansorua gageJAtalantia mor.ophyllaAntheroporum picrreiOlea maritimaDiospyros caulifioraCeltis sp.Manilkara hcxandraLagerstroemia loudoniiHydnocarpus ilicifoliusMillettia leucanthaLagerstroemia floribundaRinorea sp.30 species, each less than 1%
Ft. DetrickCategory* No. ## No. ** Percent
IIIIDIDIIIDDIDDS
8160903843
6366732235955476354
117
9166
1014449
942753829=Ui6561537060
147=U,,
29.213.511.25.54.43.93.73.53.32.52.32.21.91. 31. 11. 19.5
DominantIn'.ermc.diateShrubs and climbers
18 species29 species
7 species46 species
18.8%78.2%
3.0%
* D - dominant; I - intermediate; S - shrub or climber
** See Table 1
35
Table 4
Vegetanon Formation of Lane II, Test Area 1, Pran Buri(Data from i 1 plots)
Botanical Name Categn
Streblus zeylaruca ICleistanthus hett;rophyllus IMemecylon ovatum IAntheroportim pxerr-J. DDiospyros caulificra ICeltis sp. IMansonia gagei DEuphobia trigona IPhyllanthus sp. IVentilago calyculata SDiospyo-o^ sp. DGelomum multiflorum 1Atalantia monophy.Ua IMitrepho'i a v/iv.itii I.Hydnocarpus ilicifolius IMillettia leucantha DLagerstroerma fioribunda DDiospyros sp. DDiospyros mollis D40 species, each l^ss than 1%
DominantIntermediateShrubs and climbers
FtNo. #*
8190603632234338698834
1079
644763543331
22 species21 species16 species59 species
DetrickNo. **
91'.0.,
6?42382 9 = U j4944789840 = U3
126=Ui39
715370603937
17.6%77. 1%
5.3%
Percent
30.018.96.74.93.33.33.32.72.61.91.71.61.51.51.41. 11. 11.01.0
10.0
* D - dominant; I - intermediate; S - shrub or climber
** See Table 1
36
Tabie 5
Vegetation Formation of Lane III, Test Area 1, Pran Buri(Data from 10 plots)
Botanical Name
Streblus zeylanicaCleistanthus heterophyllusMemecylon ovatumEuphobia trigonaMansonia gageiLagerstroemia florib'jndaDiospyros caulifloraHydnocarpus ilicifoliusAntheroporum pierreiMitrephora winitiiVentilago calyculataAtalantia monophyllaCeltis sp_Phyilanthus sp.Diospyros sp.Vitex quinata38 species, each less than 1%
Category* No. *#Ft Detrick
No.** Percent
IIIIDDIT
DISIIIDI
8190603843543Z47366488
623693489
91101664449603853427198
929=Ui7840=U399
35.317.58.24.24.02.92.52.52.32.01. 81.51.51.31.31.0
10.0
DominantIntermediateShrubs and -limbers
19 species22 species13 species54 species
15.5%80.0%4.5%
D - dominant; I - intermediate; S - shrub or climber
** See Table 1
37
Table 6
Vegetation Formation of Lane IV, Test Area 1, Pran Bu- i(Data from 9 plots)
Botanical Name
Streblus zeylanicaCleistanthus heterophyllusMemecylon ovatumMansonia gageiEuphobia trigonaAntheroporum pierreiDiospyros caulifloraCleistanthvis sp.Phyllanthus sp.Mitrephora winitiiVentilago calyculataLagerstroemia floribundaCeltis sp.Sphenodesma pentandraVitex quinataHydnocarpus ilicifoliusAtalantia monophyllaCapparis thoreliiStrychnos thore'iiDiospyros sp.Diospyros mollis30 species, each less than 1%
Ft DetrickCategory* No. * No. ** Percent
IIIDIDISIISDISIIISSDD
81906043383632146964885423768947
620
1333431
911016649444238197871986C29=Ui859953
925
17240=U3
37
30.715. 16.25.25.03.73.43. 12.92.3x. 91.91.71.71.41.31.31. 11. 11. 11. 16.9
DominantIntermediateShrubs and climbers
19 species18 species14 species51 species
16.9%71.8%11.2%
* D - dominant; I - intermediate; S - shrub or climber
** See Table 1
38
Table 7
Vegetation Formation of Lane ^r, Test Area 1, Pran Buri(Data from 10 plots)
Botanical Name
Streblus zeylanicaCleistanthus heterophyllusMansonia gageiDiospyros caulifloraEuphobia trigonaSphenodesma p»:n~ar.craVitex quinataVentilago calycr. iaf.aAntheroporum pu r.r*-.iMemecylon ovatumLagerstroemia flor;bandaMitrephora winitiJLagerstroemia IcudomiPhyllanthus sp.Celtis sp.28 species, each less than 1%
Category*
IID1IST
SD1DIDII
No.**
819043323876898836605464556923
Ft DetrickNo.**
9110149384485999842666071617829-Ui
Percent
29.925. 14. 13.93.73.73.23.22. 12.02.01.91.41.41.4
DominantIntermediateShrubs and climbers
17 species18 species18 species53 species
13.4%75.2%11.4%
* D ~ dominant; I - intermediate; S - shrub or climber
*# See Table 1
39
Table 8
''"egetation Formation of Lane VI, Test Area 1, Pran Buri(Data from 9 plots)
Botanical Name
Streblus zeylanicaCleistanthus heterophyllusMansonia gageiEuphobia trigonaDiospyros caulifloraCeltis pp.Mitrephora winitiiVentilago calyculataAntheroporum pierreiDiospyros sp.Lagerstroemia loudoniiSphenodesma pentandra37 species, each less than 1%
Category*! No.**
IIDIIIISDDDS
819043383223648836345576
Ft DetrickNo.**
9110149443829=Ui71984240=U3
6185
Percent
42.421.68.33.53.52.22. 11.91.71.51.31.29.0
DominantIntermediateShrubs and climbers
16 species18 species15 species
16.3%78.8%4.9%
# D - dominant; I - intermediate; S - shrub or climber
** See Table 1
40
Table 9
Vegetation Formation of Lane VII, Test Area 1, Pran Buri(Data from 6 plots)
Botanical Name
Streblus zeylanicaCleistanthus heterophyllusDiospyros sp.Mitrephora w.initrAntheroporum pie ire;Euphobia trigonaLagerstroemia floribundaMillettia leucanthaVitex pinnataDiospyros mollis22 species, each less than 1%
Ft DetrickCategory* No. ** N£. ** Percent
IIDIDIDDDI
81903464363854638531
9110140=U3
714Z44607095=10037
37.732.25.04.62.32. 11.81.71.51.29.9
DominantIntermediateShrubs and climbers
15 species15 species2 species
32 species
16.7%82.8%
0.5%
* D - dominant; i - intermediate; S - Shrub or climber
bee Table 1
41
Table 10
Vegetation Formation of Lane VIII, Pest Area 1, Pran Buri(Data from 5 plots)
Botanical Name
Streblus zeylanicaCleistanthus heterophyllusDrypetes sp.Memecylon ovatumEuphobia trigonaMansonia gageiLagerstroemia floribundaVitex quinataAntheroporum pierreiSphenodesme pentandraVentilago calyculataZizyphus oenopliaDiospyros caulifloraManilkara hexandraDiospyros mollis36 species, each less than 1%
Category*Ft Detrick
No.** No.** Percent
IIsIIDDIDSSSIDD
8190105603843548936768891325931
911011236644496099428598102386537
29.226.85.94.74.53.42.62.32.31.81.71.71.51.31. 19.3
DominantIntermediateShrubs and climbers
22 species15 species14 species51 species
15.3%70.9%13.8%
* D - dominant; I - intermediate; S - shrub or climber
** See Table 1
42
Table 11
Vegetation Formation of JLane IX, Test Area 1, Pran Buri{Data from. 6 plots)
Botanical Name
Streblus zeylanicaCleistanthus heterophyllusMansonic gageiDiospyros molli sAntheroporum pierreiNiemecylon ovatumVitex pinnataVentilago calyculataMitrephora winitiiGrewia tomentosaEuphobia trigonaLagerstroemia floribundaCeltis sp.Diospyros sp.Manilkara hexanciraLagerstroemia loudonii19 species, eacn less than 1%
CategoryFt Detrick
No. ** No. ** Percent
IIDDDIDSIIID1DDD
81904331366085886444385423345955
1
9110)4937426695=100987150446029=11}40-U36561
38.628.36.32.42.31.91.81.81.71.71.51.51.31.31.21. 15. 1
DominantIntermediateShrubs and climbers
19 species13 species3 species
35 species
21.3%76.8%
1.9%
* D - dominant; I - intermediate; S - shrub or climber
** See Table 1
43
Table 12
Vegetation Formation of Lane X, Test Area 1, Pran Buri(Data from 4 plots)
Botanical Name
Streblus zeylanicaCleistanthus heterophyllusMansonia gageiMemecylon ovatumManilkara hexandraEuphobia trigonaAntheroporum pierreiCeltis sp.Ventilago calyculataMillettia leucanthaSphenodesma pentandraAtalantia monophyllaDiospyros caulifloraMemecylon floribundum32 species, each less than 1%
CategoryFt Detrick
No.** No.** Percent
IIDIDIDISDSIII
U9043605938362388637663258
91101496665444229=U198708593864
37.228.53.83.12.52.31.81.61.61.51.31.91. 11.0
DominantIntermediateShrubs and climbers
17 species18 species11 species46 species
15. 2%78.9%
5.9%
D - dominant; I - intermediate; S - shrub or climber
** See Table 1
44
Table 13
Vegetation Formation of Lane 2 I, Test Area 1, Pran Buri(Data from 5 plots)
Botanical Name
Cleistanthus heterophyllusStreblus zeylanicaMemecylon ovatumEuphobia trigonaMansonia gageiManilkara hexandraCeltis sp.Capparis thoreliiAntheroporum peirreiLagerstroemia floribundaDiospyros caulifloraCleistanthus sp.Ventilago calycuJataMillettia leucanthaAtalantia monophylla47 species, each less than 1%
CategoryFt Detrick
No.** No.** Percent
IIIIDDISDDISSDI
90816038435923203654321488636
101916644496529=Uj254260381998709
27.924.410.54.72.72.01. 51.51.51.51.41.31.21. 11.0
16.9
DominantIntermediateShrubs and climbers
21 specie0
21 species20 species62 species
iZ.6%74.5%10.0%
* D - dominant; 1 - intermediate; S - shrub or climber
** See Table 1
45
Table 14
Data Summary
No.* Category** PhenologyFt . Det r ick
Lane No I(8 sample plots)Lane No. II( 1 1 sample plots)
ane No. Ill0 sample plots)
Lane No. IV(9 sample plots)Lane No. V{ 1 0 sample plots)Lane No. VI(9 sample plots)Lane No. VII(o sample plots)Lane No. VIII(5 sample plots)Lane No. IX(6 sample plots)Lane No. X(4 sample plots)Lane No. XI(5 sample plots)No. of vjtems
PC rcent
Rank(1 through 17)
2D
DD3
1
-
.
1
-
_
3
1
2
-
-
8
. 04
4 6 8 9S I S S- E E -
b 9 1! 13
- 52 - -
- 35 13 3
- 28 8 -
2 27 4 -
1 28 - 1
2 13 - 3
5 - -
1 3 8 1
2 - -
- 14 1 1
- 12 10 -
6 219 44 9
.03 1.17.24 .05
16
10SE
14
*•
5
2
20
14
10
-
4
-
.
9
64
.34
12SE17
3
1
1
-
3
3
-
-
1
-
-
12
.06
13D
DD18
_
-
-
4
-
2
1
8
6
6
6
33
.18
14 16S S
DD19 21
6
8 6
c
65
13 2
1
-
13
-
1
15
125 9
.67 .05
18 20S SZ E
.23 25
1
2 7
2 8
- 24
- 26
1 6
1
9
-
4 11
3 17
13 109
.07 .53
22 23S I
E28 29
- 34
- 73
- 28
- 35
- 39
- 57
6
3
- 15
- 19
5 17
5 326
.03 1.74
9
25IE
31
4
13
4
1
2
8
3
3
2
-
1
41
.22
28S-
34
_
3
2
8
15
7
-
2
-
-
8
45
.24
29 31D D
DD DD35 37
5
- 22
- 17
- 23
1 14
19
7
18
27
3
6
1 161
.01 .86
32IE
38
44
74
47
72
11?
89
-
25
6
13
16
498
2.o6
7
33DE
39
1
23
7
10
9
5
2
1
2
8
10
78
.42
34DE
40
8
37
24
24
26
38
30
2
15
11
7
222
1.19
15
35 36I D
DD E41 42
- 49
2 109
1 43
- 79
- oO
- 45
- 14
- 38
- 25
- 21
- 17
3 500
.022.67
6
37 38I IE E
43 44
1 74
3 60
1 77
1 105
- 104
- 89
- 13
- 76
- 17
- 27
1 55
7 697
3.73
5
39D
DD45
..
-
1
-
-
-
-
1
-
1
1
2
.01
:;: D - dominant . I - in termediate , S - sh rub or c l imber ** DD - deciduous, E - evergreen, -- doub t fu l
Table 14 (Cont. )
No.* Category** PhenologyFt. Detrick
Lane No. I(8 sample plots)I anc No. II(1 1 sample plots)Lane No. UI( 1 0 sample plots)Lane No. IV(9 sample plots)Lane No. V(1 0 sample plots)Lane No. VI(9 sample plots)Lane No. VII(6 sample plots)Lane No. VIII(3 sample plots)Lane No. IX(6 sample plots)Lane No. X(4 sample plots)Lane No. XI(5 sample plots)No. of Stems
Percent
H a n k(1 t h r o u g h 17 )
40I
DD46
5
3
6
4
3
3
1
5
-
4
-
34
.18
41D
DD47
_
-
6
5
16
12
1
6
3
10
2
61
.23
42 43S D
E48 49
- 59
- 69
- 74
- 110
- 116
- 213
-
- 57
- 72
8 , 45>
- 32
8 84.7
.04 .4.53
4
44I-
50
1
4
1
1
1
1
-
-
19
2
3
33
.18
45S-
51_
-
-
4
17
4
-
2
-
-
2
29
.16
47 49I SS -
53 55
26
31
46
28
28 1
2
2
1
3
1
-
166 3
.89 .02
51D
DD57
_
1
2
4
5
-
-
-
-
-
1
13
.07
52 54S DE DD
58 60
1 14
- 25
- 54
- 40
- 56
- 13
- 11
- 44
- 17
6
- 17
1 297
.01 1.59
10
55 56D S
DD E61 62
29
15
4
13
41 2
34
5
10
13
8
5
117 2
.95 .01
57 58S IE E
63 64
3
1
- 11
1 2
-
-
5
-
-
- 12
2
6 31
.03 .17
59DE
65
30
8
9
6
4
5
3
22
14
29
23
153
82
60IE
66
180
147
152
131
57
8
6
79
22
37
123
942
5.04
3
61 63S DE DD
67 70
- 18
1 25
- 18
4 19
- 19
- 23
- 10
- 16
- 11
- 18
- 13
5 190
.03 1.02
17
64 65I S
E E71 72
f
34 3
37
48
53 2
54
28
9
19
1
6
295 5
1.58 .03
11
66I
DD73
4
6
13
2
10
10
2
3
3
7
5
65
.35
67 69I IE DD
75 78
46 11
10 58
2 25
- 61
- 41
- 18
1
4
5
3
2
58 229
.31 1.22
!4
70D
DD79
.
-
_
_
.
_
1
_
_
5
6
.03
Table 14 (Cont.)
00
No.* Category** PhenologyFt. Detrick
Lane No. I(8 sample plots)Lane No. II(1 1 sample plots)Lane No. Ill(1 0 sample plots)Lane No. IV(9 sample plots)Lane No. V(10 sample plots)Lane No. VI(9 sample plots)Lane No. VII(6 sample plots)Lane No. VIII(5 sample plots)Lane No. IX(6 sample plots)Lane No. X(4 sample plots)Lane No. XI(5 sample plots)No. of Stems
Percent
Rank(1 through 17)
72SE
81
—
-
6
4
4
.
-
5
-
.
1
20
.11
73D
DD82
_
-
1
-
4
-
-
2
4
1
1
13
.07
74D
DD83
1
I
1
2
1
-
1
.
1
-
2
10
.05
75 76I S
DD E84 85
1
5
3
- 35
- 104
- 30
4
- 31
-
- 15
9
5 232
.03 1.24
12
77D
DD86
2
2
o
2
3
5
2
4
1
2
2
31
.17
78 79D D
DD DD87 89
2
1 6
1
1
-
-
-
9
1
-
1
3 19
.02 .10
80 81I IE E
90 91
- 390
- *63
- 652
- 650
- 849
13 1094
2 228
- 491
- 439
- 441
- 286
16 6183
.09 33.05
1
84 85D DE E
94 95
8
1 7
1 10
-
-
1
9'
1
- 20
8
4 3
6 67
.03 .36
86 87D D
DD DD96 97
- 12
- 10
-
- 13
-
1
2
7
-
4
- 23
10 62
.05 .33
88SE
98
12
43
33
41
90
49
2
28
20
19
14
351
1.88
8
89 90I I
DD E99 101
12 149
19 418
19 323
30 319
92 714
9 557
- 195
39 452
- 322
4 338
7 318
231.4105
1.23 21.95
13 2
91 92 93S D I
DD DD E102 103 104
1
6 2
3
2
4
.
.
28 2 -
.
3 - 1
5 - 1
5 2 4 2
.28 .02 . 01
94 96 97 98 100I D D D DE E DD DD E105 107 108 109 111
'. 1
- 18
-
-
1 1
1 1
. . . . .
.
4 2 - -
2
1 1 - - 8
2 32 5 1 8
.01 .17 .03 .01 .04
: Table 14 (Cont. )j
No. 101 102 105 107 109 111 114 115 116 117 118 125 127 128 '.32 13? 135 139 140 141 143-Category#* PhenologyFt. Detrick
Lane No. I(8 sample plots)Lane No. II(11 sample plots)
i Lane No. IllI (10 sample plots)) Lane No. IVI (9 sample plots)1 Lane No. VS (10 sample plots)
r; Lan^ No. VI
i w sampir p 'ois jLane No. VU
1 (6 san pie plots)i I.ar No. VIU\ ,b si nj. > plots)* ^ane No. IXf (6 sample plots)-* Lane •••o. XV i ->ample pl">'.s)., Lane No. '-'.iI '& sample plots)
i.1 01 "' '•.mi
>» rcent
IE
14
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
'L
2
31
1 S I S D IE DD E E E E
120 123 126 137 139 144
2
36 - - 6
1 1
1
1
5 - - - 8
.
. 9 9 .
.
6 - 4
1 4 . . . 9
1 103 37 6 1 31
.01 .58 .20 .03 .01 .17
IDD145
-
3
-
2
-
1
-
-
-
2
-
8
.04
DE
146
4
5
7
1
5
4
-
2
-
4
2
34
.18
S I S S S D S S S S S DE E E - - D D E - . . . D O
'47 148 157 159 161 171 172 ] 74 179 180 181 183
14
8 - 2 - - 1
9 3 - - - - 1
24 -
3 - - - - 2 0 5 - ~ -
2 1 . . .
-
<: i . . . 5
i
i
• • - 5 1 - 1 1 1 4
31 6 2 5 - 1 1 5 0 7 1 3 4 5
.17 .03 .01 .03 .01 .01 .27 .04 .0' .02 .02 03
TOTAL97 species
1.335
2 ,203
1, 845
2, 115
2, 843
2, 580
60S
1, 604
1. 13o
1. 186
1, 174
18, 706
100. l i %
\
Table 15
Summary of Formation and Phenology
Item
Total species in the test area I
Total species were counted in 83 plots
Percent formation in plots (%)
Dominant
46
34
17
Intermediate
35
29
75
Shrubs
64
34
8
Totals
145
97
100
Phenology
Deciduous species (in 83 plots)
Percent formation (%)
Evergreen species (in 83 plots)
Percent formation (%)
Doubtful species (in 83 plots)
Percent formation (%)
TOTAL
24
11
9
6
1
1
17
7
3
21
71
1
1
75
3
2
18
5
13
2
8
34
16
48
82
15
3
100
UnclassifiedSecurity (. 'K-sSiiiic
DOCUMKNT COHTKCL DATA - RJ.D/ »» t **• r ' «•->.-/ ^.rf.«» me •••ir«- »« • . _v »>u* • t»> P-I •«. t 4* c /*<(' /!* «i
' ".<M«';tW* 1 IN O AC 'I '/I "* V 'Co V""1"*** j.\-.> J * K i n & n T l * C U n < T V C l A t f r t » t C A
OSD/ARPA R&D Fiela Lnit-Thailand, Mil i tary : UnclassifiedResearch and Development Center, Bangkok
Vegetation Analysis of Pran Euri Defoliation lest Area 1
. - .
Kaosingha, Ainmiay, and Kei lcy, John W. , Jr. , Capt. , USA
• RE«-O »1 OA reJanuary 1966
.» r A O J V C T no
.- Task
•>* 'c' « L ><o e<-
ix+55Of" C |M» TQ^'S f*cr-O**T i
66-007
1C A V A l L A B I L I T V / t l K I T A T l O M H-Of lCCS
None
E M E M T A R V MOTCS ; 12 SPCNSORIMO U IV ITARV ACTIV ITY
Office of the Secretary of Defense,Advanced Research Projects Agency
The vegetation of the defoliation test site 1 at Pran Buri was describedand inventoried so that data would be available for precise evaluation ofthe effects of defoliant spraying. The site is in a Dry or Semi-evergreenforest. Vegetation was divided into categories according to physiologiccharacteristics: dominant species, intermediate species, shrubs andclimbers, and ground cover. Of the 16-1 s p e r < e s found in the area, 46 weredominant, 35 v>-ere intermediate, 61 were ah iubs and climbers, and 19were ground cover. All species belong to 11 7 genera from 52 families.Formation percent?.^e for each category was determined along cameratrails in each of the 83 test plots and was determined by counting stems ofeach species round in a 30-ft strip 530 f^. along the trails. The formationpercentages were found to be 17 percent for dorrinant, 75 percent inter-mediate, and 8 percent for shrubs and climbers. Ground cover was ex-cluded from the stem count, as it would be a virtually impossible task onthat scale cf test areas and would probably contribute little to the evalua-tion. The formation percentages according to phenology were found to be16 percent deciduous, 82 percent evergreen, and 2 percent uncertain.
DD /.?:-.. 1473 UnclassifiedSecurity Classification
55
UnclassifiedSecurity
rev woaos
vegetation, Dry or Semi-evergreen forestDry or Semi-evergreen forestdefoliation site, Pran Buri, Thailand
U K K B
10 i 310 i 39 i 2
L I N K C
«»:
(I)
(2)
INSTRUCTIONS1. ORIGINATING ACTIVITY: Enlrr the n-f.-.e (.nd a.UTeur* iirnc..*af ihe> com sic tor, ^uhronlrftctoc, grantee, Department 'if De-f»na* activity or other organization f<0nvo/-a/« miihvr) iB«j:ngthe report.:«. RKTORT SECURITY CLASS. Fl'.'ATTON: Enter the over-all «ecurjty classification of *h« r^,^rt» Indicate whether"RralriOed. D»ia" It> Included. MarVins in to be in «ccor*• nee with appropriate necunty regujationc.2o. GROUP: Auttmrnc duwncredmn l:i tpeclliett m DoD Di-rective 1200.10 «rxl ArmcxJ Fortes I t :du»t r>al Manual. Enterit* ^rov.p number. A!«o. fj^fn upplicoblc. the*- that crpilunatnwrkir.^s h*vi? Uet-n use<! ftrf Group 3 aruJ Croup 4 at author-ire.t.
3. REPORT TITLED Enter ihir corrolete report t i t l e in allcapital letteiu. Titles In all c»»r« ahould be uf>i.las«ifi*<lIf a meaningful title canflot be aelrcted witr-/>tu c lavvl f ica 'tion, fthc« l i t lr cla*tiftcaii r*r> in all chpituli (n par«*mneAtaimmediately following tlie i>!le.4. DESCRIPTIVE NOTKS It tfp,>rct)r.«e, enter the type ofrrr>°rt, «•.(,, interim, procre«*. lummsry. annual, or final.O«ve the inclumve da!r» when n specific rpr-ortme p^-riMl it
b> »cxnriiy stuiidnrrl «l>:rr...- i
i may obtain ropiea of t h t xreport from t"DC."''Foteicn (.rjiouncofnent and dii••nxfnalton of tHt/evon hy DDC is not »u1hori/»d.""U. S. Government i*t*«rte% roay ohtatn copie?i cthin rn«"< <li /rct ly /mm DDC. Oth« qaul i f i r l OUXCIK stuUI rcqueki through
"U. S. m>!t t»ry <g#n: .e»report d t r e c i l y /r»im DDOjhul l
>ay obtain cup l rn of t h i nOth<'i nual i f ied u & r r *
"AllUDC unur
n of (hiA r«r<orl i« confrolli'd.«h*il request t
Ooal
fi. AUTJIOH(Si: Knlcr the r.a(nr«) of uutltor<«) am shown onor in the rijtort. Mnlcv l*«at name, f irst r.-ime, r»:d^l< >> .nt inl .If y l l i t u f f y , itlvDiv r»nk aA-1 bmn4-h of aervtce. Th« n&rte'o(the principal » tthor i» *n absolute rninitnufn r^qtur-r-rtenl.fc. RF.POB'r HAT:', Enter tnt .late of tht- retx»l »•> d»v,month. V'»: »f rwirvh. >» ar. If mure Hian r.nf < l» t e .^(i<rarn
If the repcrt has br»n foriuahed to tha Offlc* of TechnicalServi -»», Drt>w!mtni of Ccmmerce, for Kale to Ih* pulilic. Indi-cate tKia foci and rnlrr th« price, if krvowrwII. SUri'[,r;Mr;NTARY NOTES: U»e for »ddl(lon«J r.r>l»na-tory notee.J2. SPON^>»IN%n Mil T T A R V ACTIVITY: Enter the name olthe dtf B ' f i r f j l prrt;n.l <:l l i( .e i< i lohorjlory i;pona<iHr>it ^p»>-»n^ f n f / i l . c re'.eurT ui:f* dn^ '-ItujTcni. Include adctrets.
AHiliiAl'f I..-
'.'/,. TOTAL SHMVIKR Ol- PAGER: Tl>o I.JK! p,.p:e count<r-ould f ' . l lnw norma* y ' l i^inai i '^o prc* erture^. i.e., rioter thenumber of pagrs rontMtxiinx lnl'>fo:ntiAn.76. NUMUF.R OF R>J-'F.RENCKS; Knter the to ta l numt,«, t,frcfer"t>*ra t i t rr t i:t ihe rej^or!.Ko. CONTRACT OR GRANT NVJWMER; If Bprsropfiaio. en'.erthe <p;>l«t.^bte number of the c i»ni»ar t ur graol under whf~hthe report wn*» -Annen,fih. fe. fc Sd. PROJKCT Vt'WQFI'.: r>trr the »pi>iopri»l<tn i i i tu ry department irlertifica:iin, such aa v>roj«ci nuiuUer,vi'liprota'C t rrurnbar, avvtern r^umbets. laak numher, atr.9» ORIGINATOR'S RKJ'ORT KUMBF.R(S): Errter the clfi-fc'ml rtport numbe-r by which the d*x.ymeni will be irferufiad«nd «:<>mrollvd by Iho uri|xinatln«: activity. Thit number multl*t uruilur :o Inn rrporl.f'b. OTMKR HEPORi NUVTWER<U): If the r«pon ha-: been.«i«lani-d ui.y other report nuBiberu (tnhrr by Iha o'lfiiiaror<*r *)?• ih* *fjon»<tt), nlso enter t ius *iumber(*i).I1J. AVAILABILITY/LIMITATION NOTICF.S: Fj«er any llwuiilinnif .»» (urlhir d i^seminr t ion cf the report, olher than ihoiel
.iMn*r t g iv ing • hricf and f B r t t i a !ticaSvi of the r*p^rt, even ihouxrii •-> ;»•••• j i><fy jf (he 1ccHr.:c*l rt-M .(n". ri a C"nt tnobl lor \ ».Ke«l sh*.
:! rr^v A. - .^ npC-M* If H .^d . 'Kfce *'.!«. t«. .:
I1 is ij .flMy 4-?t. .-y;. . t t r ia l the *bvrfcct cf clas*if iert r r p o t t -br urc lc < t b : t i r J. Earf i parderttph of the ahtt iact Shalt rrtrt iv:*.-.an i rd i ra tu t i of Ihr m i l i r a r y » e r u r i t y r)»m it-alien cl thr irJomet 3n ui tin- pnfkgn,pii . reprf«entcd a> OTS) fS;. CCJ. -,f it-'.
Thtt/* i f t T W Itever, thr ^-;p(i<vite
M KEY LORDS' Kry w(>rt)9 aro t echn ica l ly r r .eAran^f j l ten -or &hort phro«es tha t <.h«rac:ef'ue A report and may be tmrM M ^index rntncs (or c » ( u Irvine, the report Kty woido muil r«eselected »o thn t no n e c i i n l y cl««»if tr .at ion it r«>qul."*1 Idrnnfieri, nurrh us equipment model <1«li(cn« t;on, (rarte ritme. ni! i ' /project code nnme. geographic location, may be uteri *a kr>-wcrrt» but w i l l h» follcrwcd by an inrt icyl ion of technical < of-ten. The mxigr.ment of h n « i . rulet. urut w r l g r \ t > i IK op i>on» i
i ' A t K i n on the I rn^ ih u' ^*e aba l ra f f I I . ;l eng th is from I S O 10 225 wr»rdn.
UnclassifiedSecuri ty Classification
56
UNCLASSIFIED/UNLIMITED
PLEASE DO NOT RETURN
THIS DOCUMENT TO DTIC
EACH ACTIVITY IS RESPONSIBLE FOR DESTRUCTION OF THIS
DOCUMENT ACCORDING TO APPLICABLE REGULATIONS.
UNCLASSIFIED/UNLIMITED
The Effects ofHerbicides inSouth Vietnam
PART A - SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Committee on the Effects of Herbicides in VietnamDivision of Biological SciencesAssembly of Life SciencesNational Research Council
National Academy of SciencesWashington. O.C.
1974
VII-7
(2) The TCDD Problem in South Vietnam
TCDD in Soil and Fish and Shellfish from Southeast Asia
TCDD (see Section II C[4]) occurs as a contaminant of 2,4,5-T; theherbicide most widely used in the Vietnam war. This Section brieflyreviews the present status of the TCUD problem in SVN.
When the Committee's field studies were being planned and carriedout we were not in the possession of information regarding the extentand distribution of the use of Agent Orange and thus the possible distribu-tion of TCDD in SVN. Nor were there methods available to detect it at thelow levels of concentration which might be found after spraying in soils,plants, and animal tissues. Analyses were carried out for the soil samplesfrom the Pran Buri Calibration Grid which had received a total of almost1000 Ib/acre of 2,4,5-T in 1964-65 (see Section V A). The analyses wereconducted by the Huntingdon Research Centre, using the method describedby Woolson e_t a 1. (I.y73) , and the results, compared with data on2,4,5-T, are shown in Table VII A-3. Three of the six samples containedTCDD. Two of these also contained 2,4,5-T, but the third did not, norwas TCDD detected in the sample with the highest 2,4,5-T content (No. 3).Two samples from a site which was as far as could be ascertained, out-side the Calibration Grid perimeter contained neither compound. Assumingfirstly that no degradation of the TCDD took place, and secondly thatthe recovery was 100 percent, the original concentration of the TCDD inthe Agent Orange (2,4,5-T ester) sprayed on the Calibration Grid wouldrange from <3 to 50 ppm. The soil of the Calibration Grid was sandy,and therefore favorable for leaching, but the high persistence of TCDDin soils of this type agrees with the results of experimental tests(see Section II C[4]}.
At a time when the Committee was reaching the end of its investiga-caons, Baughman and Meselson (1973) developed their new, highly sensitiveanalytical method for the compound and reported to have found TCDD infish and shellfish from SVN. Their results are shown in Table VII A-4.The highest concentrations were found in fish samples from the Dong-NaiRiver above Bien-Hoa. Lesser quantities were found in fish and shell-fish samples from the Saigon River north of Saigon, and from the sea-coast at the Can-Gio District, in the southeastern end of the Rung SatSpecial Zone. All samples were collected in 1970 and analyzed in 1973.The watershed of the Dong-Nai River includes the heavily sprayed WarZone D north and northeast of Saigon. The Saigon River drains parts ofWar /one C, to the west of War Zone D. The number of samples studied byflaughman and Meselson (1973) is quite small and no samples were takenfrom rivers in SVN which did not drain heavily herbicide-sprayed areas,nor from locations elsewhere in Southeast Asia. The only control usedwas a fish from Cape Cod; no TCDD was detected in this material (limit,0.000003 ppm). However, the pattern of the TCDD levels found isconsistent with origin in Agent Orange. Baughman and Meselson(personal communications) analyzed their samples also for hexa-chlorodioxin and 1,3,6,8-tetrachlorodioxin which should be present
VII-8
Table VII A-3
Results of TCDD Analyses in Soil Samples from the
Calibration Grid near Pran Buri
TCDD 2,4,S-T.Sample No.
j_
23456
Controls
12
ppm
<0.00120.0135<0.00120.0233<0.00200.0052
<0.0012<0.0012
Ib/acre
<0.0030.042<0.0040.060<0.0060.016
<0.003<0.003
ppm
<0.02<0.020.610.430.020.04
<0.02<0.02
lb/acre
<0.03<0.031.350.960.060.09
<0.02<0.02
Only the top portions (ca. 20 cm) of the cores wereanalyzed for TCDD. The center portion of Core No. 2contained no detectable TCDD (<0.0012 ppm).
Table VII A-4
TCDD in fish and shellfish from SVN.(After Baughmar. and Meselson, 1973)
Collection Site
Dong Nai River,north of Bien Hoa
Saigon River,north of Saigon
Can Gio District(seacoast)
Fish or Shellfish
Carp (Cyprinidae)Catfish (Siluridae)Catfish (Tachipuridae)
Catfish (Schilbacidae)River prawn (Palaemonidae)
Croaker (Sciaenidae)Prawn (Penaeidae)
Mean TCDD level(ppm wet body weigh
0.0005400.000814C.000522
0.0000700.000042
0.0000790.000018
Collections were made in August-September 1970. The entire fishor shellfish was ground and kept frozen until analysis. Valuescorrected for recovery.
62-c' I SI
UNCLASSIFIED/UNLIMITED
TechnicalReport
xu C
distributed by
Defense Technical Information CenterDEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY
Cameron Station • Alexandria, Virginia 22314
UNCLASSIFIED/UNLIMITED
VEGETATION
OFSOITHEAST ASIA
STL DIES OF FOREST TYPES1963 -1965
C /
C L E A R I N G H O U S EFOR PEDEUAJ, SCIENTIFIC AND
TECHNICAL INFORMATIONBardoopy ] Mloroflib*
'•^
( .S. D K I ' V K I M K M Ol \ ( , K I C l I / I t K K
I M. l i - r S K I ' V Ot . l r r No. I.M
\ i l \ i i i i < - < - < | |{i—curc!i I ' rojrrl- \ f ; r i i r \
!)c|>:irt i i i ' -r it of Di'fcri-r
According to the authors, perhaps the greatest contribution tospecies identification that color film maXes is the hue- chroma com-bination. It is interesting to note that before takinr, the test,most of the interpreters had a preconceived notion that tree imageswould appear r;reen or blue <.;reen with a few preen yellows. Thedata showed, however, that most of the species were tallied asyellow to f;reen yellow and that only two approached a r^reen hue.
On the ba^is of the test, accurate identification of individualtree species requires color film at a photo scale of l:15fi'* orlarrer. Kven on color filrr., the 1:39 0 scale produced fairly lowaccuracies of interpretation (63 percent).
The cost of usinr, color filn at lart',e scales should be littlemore than that required for panchromatic filn. While color filmcosts five tir.es as much as pin chromatic film, the important pointis that film cost i:; only a snail part of the total cost of aerialphoto.-'rapir . aircraft costs, standby time for the flir.htcrew, elimination o:' Lhu r.eed for prints, and reduction of photohandli.M,' by interpret!:! • color film in rolls are considered, the'jy.tr a cost of color ; iln is minor. Increased interpretation ac-ruracy on color r'iLn we old counter balance any sli~ht increase in
idr . 'LL re for o : ; . - < . • . ,-* fort:st,;; r t ro j.is
to ri*'ri;d. f iho to -raphy of tropical and,--• 1 in the Biblio,-raphy (Part III).
:•;..;;.; M;H II^.-OLIA::?.- IN
I n :,'cvor-.tjer J ' -
: -Vu-via.vi , or..! a .V ru .
jcc:.-:TYi:.ied by Colonel '.'ivcm of CLTC, Lieut.Llr.y: ..>u, attache.! *.o trc- :< Lo lo . - i c ro l Luaorat-rry at Fort Detrirk,
.,t rar.-er f rom the Thai Forest Department, wef •-• . i - 1 , ' " ( • ( ' . acre test-site near Pranburi, upper
• ".'i j : ; ; , ' d a . A'- that *.rv a j.orics of trails had been opened, tof ' i - i J i ' . at,f j I ' l ' . i . - t r - i t i , : ' : \ : . r . r t , t ; e 'jj-ea. At-rioi spraying ha/i not yet
I:: f . - i r Jy ;'--::rr-!v I • • ' ^ , .,". Robert A. Darrow, of the Biolor.icol; / . • :-;it( ry a% :-r,rt : • ' : : - : • • • : , ."..u-yla.'i'.i, w h r > has cherre ot tne te-.ts,; : , ; i ' . ' - j :",'.• t . - j a-:,-:.T.T;a-.y r.l". on a one-day survey of l.ne s j te .
I;: t r . C ' iv-r::i;- : ve ir.spectcd several trails opened to mal<e close-'.; , v i . . ua i st. : i l t ; s f f T.I/J t - f f e c t of chc-ldals on d i f fe ren t plants,':.:..: t - ' (i'jtt.-!"" i :.e tr;r . ; t - e - ? i u s t : a t hod survived or showed semblance o'.r - - -r ' .vth. Cr: s.: t - r a L l s nrv : also ncen opened to SCL up a series of•••! .-••:• ' ! . , . at i:.ti_-rvU.o :.:' a:.;:ut v<"> feet , to obtain a photographic re-c ' . r : c.f t . i • • i .or.etraL ic:. of su.-cessive ar;:lications, a:id to aet.er:r.inet . ; . i _ - r p - : J J tfU'.*. e f fe : : t or. t:".*.• YC 'etation.
•• «UM
In the afternoon, we made a series of runs, in the plane usedor .spraying, over various plots in the test-site, to observe from
,he air the effect of defoliants on the vegetation, especially toraprove air-to-ground visibility.
Chemical defoliants modify the general appearance of vegetationFig. 130), induce desiccation of stems, branches and bark, and•ecult in the partial or complete shedding of leaves (Fig. 133).'*'C vegetation assumes an over-all light grayish tone (Fig. 134)..jere is improvement in ground-to-ground visibility. However, theried stems of shrubs and trees which remain standing continue torovido come cover for ambush. An enemy can still be camouflagedo blend with the changed color of the vegetation, which wovJd makeetection even on the ground, and especially from the air, difficult.hen seen from an altitude of upwards of 1,000 feet, the grayishreused swaths are sharply defined from the untreated strips in be-ween. There is a decided improvement in air-to-ground visibility,.-.pecially at an olitiude of 1,000 to 2,000 ft., RS a means to spotbjects moving on the ground.
The most widespread and tallest plant pests in Thailand, Vietnam.nd adjoining countries are: L-jpatorium odoratum, known in Vietnam:; 'yen-bach1; Impcrata cyiiniLrica, called 'traiih1 in Vietnam, or/. hn-luang' in Thailand; &icciipruri of f icir.arun, 'nia1; and a species!' graos, Heyraudit.. The fir.st two-named are especially common along'.."-•Jways, trails, in forest clearings, and in fact almost everywheren'-re there (ire open sites. Tr.ey grow up to 2 or '» feet all, andr- .v ide ideal sites for arnb.ish, even where a helicopter nay land..vi.-;e plants can, no doubt, be controlled effectively or eradicated/ t i c ; application of chemicals.
When we realize the great expanse and wide diversity of vegetation:, Vietnam, Thailand and in the adjoining countries we recognize ther - r r . r - l e x and d i f f i cu l t problems involved in attempting to blanket a"j'«',e area vi tn defoliants. It seen^ that the application ^f such:,<•: . ! ) ' cols would be most practical to suppress or to eradicate the tallr>:.,:;e:j, especially Tjnperala rylin iri ca and such veeds aj Eupatorium:< rat'j;-i, cc.rsmon along highways , railrcxids, canals, streams and
Defoliants could be applied7'jrr., i n forest clearings and savannas.•;uj,j,re:i:; ujidergrowth in rubber plantations; veeds around airports
; e:,{>ocial-ly laridi^ sites used by helicopters; stora<;e areas;' -u r ;d h.'unLc-t.;; and particularly around troop concentrations and1. '. tary
E. TASK FORCE SAIGON EVALUATION, 1963
1. In September 1963, a Task Force Saigon team was established bythe Commander, U. S. Military Assistance Command, Vietnam, at therequest of the Departments of State and Defense, to evaluate the herbi-.cide operations conducted in the P.epublic of Vietnam from September1962 to September 1963. The evaluation included nine defoliationtargets, all of which were along lines of communication. The surveyshowed that the averape percentage visibility over the range of the ninetarget contiguous areas was about 40% vertical (range 25 - 75%) and30% horizontal (range 15 - 60%). The average percentage of visibilityover the range of the corresponding defoliated areas was about 30%(range 60 - 90%) and 75% horizontal (range 50 - 85%). The T/F Saigonteam's survey showed an increase in the horizontal visibility over thatestimated by the earlier ARPA's team, but the vertical visibilityestimates were the same. COMUSMACV concluded that defoliationoperations had a definite military value and recommended the programbe continued. Both State and Defense Departments subsequentlyapproved the program and it continued to increase in magnitude andeffectiveness through the remainder of the year.
F. THAILAND TESTS, 1964 - 1965
1. Jfc»BB*pPPf«PKm was conducted in Thailand in 1964 and 196Edetermine th^ effectiveness of aerial applications of Purple, Orarother candidate chemical agents in defoliation of upland ~JUHf[e vegeta-"
ittMPNprei santative of Southeast Asia on duplicate 10-tacre plots. Aerialspray treatments were applied at --ates of 0. 5 to 3. 0 gallons per acreon two test sites representing tropical dry evergreen forest and secondaryforest and shrub vegetation. Applications were repeated in alternate 2-to 3-month period to determine minimal effective rates and properseason of application.
a. Applications of Purple, Orange, and Pink at rates of 0. 5to 3. 0 gal/acre were made in alternate 2- to 3-month periods to determineminimal effective rates and proper season Vf application. Cacodylic acidand other desiccants and herbicides were evaluated in dry season andrainy season applications. Treatments were made on duplicate 10-acreplots, approximately 300 by 1500 feet.
b. • Defoliation effectiveness was evaluated by visual estimatesof overall vegetation and individual species defoliation, measurementsof changes in canopy obscuration by a vertical photography technique,and measurements of changes in horizontal visibility of a human- sizedtarget at various range^,. Data provided by these techniques were usedin comparative evaluation of defoliant chemicals in relation to rate,volume, season of application, canopy penetration, and .'egetationresponse. Results of the test program showed that:
15
If 2,4-D were applied to a moist loam soil undersummertime temperature at a rate of 0.5 to 3 pounds/acre (lb/A), itwould disappear in 7 to 30 days (37). If applied at rates of 4 to 55lb/A, it would probably disappear in one to three months (22). If2,4-D were applied to the soil at a concentration of 500 ppm anddisappeared at a rate proportional to the breakdown of 55 lb/A, thecalculated time would be 5.6 years. However, there is evidence thata more realistic time for inactivation of 500 ppm would be less (4).
Persistence of 2,4,5-T in soils is usually two tothree times longer than 2,4-D (22), and very few organisms have beenidentified as having the ability to breakdown the 2,4,5-T molecule(2). Newton (46) has calculated from studies on the kinetics ofdegradation by microorganisms that 2,4,5-T has a half-life of sevenweeks in the forest floor. Investigations by Winston and Ritty (59)and Reigner et al (51) indicated that both 2,4-D and 2,4,5-T aredecomposed to form carbon dioxtde, inorganic chlorides and water;objectionable chlorophenols are not end-products of this decomposi-tion. Further supporting evidence has been provided by Reinhart(52). The upper half of a 60 acre timber watershed in northern WestVirginia was logged and treated with 2,4,5-T ester to kill all vegeta-tion. The volume of herbicide that was applied was 1,325 gal on 30acres (418 liters/ha). Almost 790 gal of this were potential contami-nating materials: about 740 gal of diesel oil and 50 gal of a commer-cial formulation of 2,4,5-T (313 pounds acid equivalent). Reinhartfound np_ odor contaminants (phenols or catechols) in the numerouswater samples taken from the stream draining the treated watershed.
In relation to the effects of herbicides on the soilsof South Vietnam, the National Academy of Science published a reportby Blackman et al (11) on persistence and disappearance of herbicidesin tropical soils. The 1974 report stated a number of general con-clusions, namely:
1. The behavior of herbicides in the soils ofSouth Vietnam was similar to that reported for soils elsewhere.
2. Only where 2,4-D and 2,4,5-T were applied invery massive doses; e.g., at the-at rates in the magnitude of 1,000 Ib/A, were there still residues(10 years following application) in concentrations above the thresholdlikely to induce phytotoxic symptoms in some plant species.
3. When applied to mangrove soils at totaldoses approaching 10 Ib/A of 2,4-D and of 2,4,5-T, the level ofherbicide residue at the end of 30 weeks had no effect on the estab-lishment of two major mangrove species.
4. In geographical areas subjected to one ortwo military herbicide missions 1.5 years before sampling, no soilphytotoxic residues could be detected.
III-5
shiner and mosquito fish. The sample of mosquito fish consisted ofbodies with heads and tails removed. Two samples of sailfin shinerwere analyzed: one containing viscera only and the other bodies lessheads, viscera and caudal fins. Only the viscera contained TCDD.Samples of skin, muscle, gonads, and gut were obtained from spottedsunfish, from the test grid pond. Levels TCDD in those body partswere 4, 4, 18 and 85 ppt, respectively. Gross pathological observa-tions off the sunfish revealed no significant lesions or abnormalities.
••'.., 2- Residues in Soils«•»
'% The National Academy of Science (15) reported findingTCDD concentrations of <1.2 to 23.3 parts per billion (ppb) in soilof the I HWWff iPWIrwWWFirtt fNi wi iwan area used in cali-brating RANCH HAND aerial equipment. Wool son et al (60) found noresidues in 1971 in Lakeland sand which had received 947 Ib/A of2,4,5-T during 1962-1964. These unusually high doses resulted fromtesting of aerial application equipment at Eglin AFB, Florida.Although analysis of the applied material was not conducted, 2,4,5-Tmade prior to 1968 probably contained enough TCDD to be detectedthroughout the 1-yard of soil profile sampled. Wool son et al suggestedthat the lack of detectable residue was due probably to its decom-position on or in the soil and/or to its transportation by winderosion.
•'i Young et al (64) conducted four years of field studieson the persistence of Herbicide Orange and TCDD when applied atmassive rates to soils. Herbicide Orange "biodegradation" plots wereestablished in Utah (Air Force Logistics Command Test Range) and inFlorida (Eglin AFB Reservation) using simulated subsurface injectiontechniques to place the herbicide 4 to 5 inches beneath the soilsurface in bands 2.5 or 6 inches wide for Utah or Florida, respectively.An application rate of 4,000 Ib herbicide/A resulted in initial TCDDresidues of approximately 148 ppb and 0.375 ppb in the Utah andFlorida plots, respectively. Figure 1 is a semi-logarithmic plot ofthe soil concentration of Herbicide Orange while Figure 2 is a semi-logarithmic plot of the soil concentration of TCDD in the same fieldtests. Using Figures 1 and 2, the half-life data were calculated as300 and 220 days for Orange, and 320 and 230 days for TCDD for Utahand Florida, respectively. It should be emphasized again that thesedata were from field plots where the herbicide and TCDD were injectedas highly concentrated herbicide in narrow bands beneath the soilsurface. Data on soil penetration of TCDD within the soil profile ofUtah biodegradation plots receiving either 1,000, 2,000 or 4,000 Ib/Aare shown in Table 1 (Unpublished data: Young, A.L., and E.L. Arnold.1978. Report on TCDD soil penetration studies. USAF Occupationaland Environmental Health Laboratory, Brooks AFB, Texas). Note thatin Table 1, 98 percent of all TCDD was detected in the 0-6 inchincrement of soil, the increment into which the herbicide was applied.Even in the plots receiving 4,000 Ib/A, the TCDD detected in the 6-12
111-12
11-3
B. The Military Use of Herbicides in SVN
Research on 2,4-D, 2,4,5-T and related herbicides began during WorldWar II > and ^a<^ at that time a clearly military connotation. However,herbicides were not used for military purposes in World War II. The first,small-scale military use of herbicides was in the 1950's in the Malayan"emergency." In the early 1960's the possibility of tactical use of herbi-cides was given considerable impetus. A number of herbicides were evaluated,in various combinations, for their phytotoxic effectiveness in SVN. Evalua-tions were also made in 'WfiflJl'WWrtWlUl 'flU'll Bui*, in Hawaii, and in PuertoRico. The Committee was able to use some of the test sites at Pran Burifor its studies, mainly on persistence of herbicides and their possibleeffects on soil, and to observe the present condition of vegetation inthe test sites in Puerto Rico.
(1) The Course of the Military Herbicide Operations in SVN
In SVN, the first military herbicide operations were carried outin early 1962, and were phased out in 1971. After a relatively slowbuildup from 1962 to 1965, the operations increased rapidly to a peak in1967, declined, but only slightly, in 1968 and 1969, and dropped sharplyin 1970. According to information from DOD, the last herbicide sprayingby fixed-wing aircraft was flown on January 7, 1971. After this, herbi-cide operations were limited to spraying around perimeters of the firebases, on enemy cache sites, and along land and water communication routes,and were all carried out by helicopter or on the ground. The last heli-copter operation under U. S. control was flown on October 31, 1971.
Details of the herbicide operations for the period August 1965through February 1971 will be given in Sections III A and B; informationnot covered in these sections will be discussed in Section III C.
(2) The Herbicidal "Agents" Used
The herbicidal "Agents" used for military purposes in SVN wereidentified by code names referring to the color of bands painted on thecontainers of the chemicals: Orange, White, Blue, and Purple.
Agent (Drange is a 50:50 mixture of the rv-butyl esters of 2,4-D({2,4-dichlorophenoxy]acetic acid) and 2,4,5-T ([2,4,5-trichlorophenoxy]acetic acid). Each gallon of Orange contains 4 Ib of 2,4-D and 4.6 Ibo* 2,5,5-T on an acid equivalent basis. Orange was the agent used
Acid equivalent is the weight of the acid form of the chemical. Thisis used because the weights of various ester or amine formulations vary.Expression in terms of acid equivalents provides a uniform basis forcomparison of different formulations.