The following bibliography has been generated by bringing together all references provided by our content partners. There may be duplication.


  • Brummitt, R. K. 2007. Report of the Nomenclature Committee for vascular plants: 59. (1710). To conserve Xanthocyparis Farjon & Hiep against Callitropsis Oerst. (Cupressaceae). Proposed by R.R. Mill & A. Farjon in Taxon 55: 229-231. 2006. Votes: 14-4 (recommended). Taxon, vol. 56. 1290-1291
  • Farjon & Harder. 2002. In: Novon 12 (2): 188.
  • Farjon A. (2015). Conifer Database (version Jan 2014). In: Species 2000 & ITIS Catalogue of Life, 26th August 2015 (Roskov Y., Abucay L., Orrell T., Nicolson D., Kunze T., Flann C., Bailly N., Kirk P., Bourgoin T., DeWalt R.E., Decock W., De Wever A., eds). Digital resource at Species 2000: Naturalis, Leiden, the Netherlands. ISSN 2405-8858.
  • Little, Damon P. 2006. Evolution and circumscription of the true cypresses (Cupressaceae: Cupressus). Systematic Botany, vol. 31, no. 3. 461-480
  • Marticorena C & R Rodríguez . 1995-2005. Flora de Chile. Vols 1, 2(1-3). Ed. Universidad de Concepción, Concepción. 351 pp., 99 pp., 93 pp., 128 pp. Matthei O. 1995. Manual de las malezas que crecen en Chile. Alfabeta Impresores. 545 p.
  • de Laubenfels, D. J. 2009. Nomenclatural Actions for the New World Cypresses (Cupressaceae). Novon, vol. 19, no. 3. 300-306
    1. Andersen, Harold E. 1959. Silvical characteristics of Alaska-cedar  (Chamaecyparis nootkatensis). USDA Forest Service, Station Paper  11. Alaska Forest Research Center, Juneau. 10 p.
    3. Antos, Joseph A., and Donald B. Zobel. 1984. Habitat relationships of  Chamaecyparis nootkatensis in southern Washington, Oregon, and  California. Canadian Journal of Botany 64:1898-1909.
    5. Arno, Stephen F. 1966. Interpreting the timberline. Thesis (M,F.),  University of Montana, Missoula. (Printed by West. Res. Off., U.S.  National Park Service, San Francisco, CA. 206 p.)
    7. Barton, G. M. 1976. A review of yellow cedar (Chamaecyparis  nootkatensis [D. Don] Spach) extractives and their importance to  utilization. Wood and Fiber 8(3):172-176.
    9. Eyre, F. H., ed. 1980. Forest cover types of the United States and  Canada. Society of American Foresters, Washington, DC. 148 p.
    11. Farr, Wilbur A., and Vernon J. LaBau. 1971. Volume tables and  equations for old-growth western redcedar and Alaska-cedar in southeast  Alaska. USDA Forest Service, Research Note PNW-167. Pacific Northwest  Forest and Range Experiment Station, Portland, OR. 18 p.
    13. Franklin, J. F., and C. T. Dyrness. 1973. Natural vegetation of  Oregon and Washington. USDA Forest Service, General Technical Report  PNW-8. Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station, Portland,  OR. 417 p.
    15. Frenkel, R. E. 1974. An isolated occurrence of Alaska-cedar (Chamaecyparis  nootkatensis [D. Don] Spach) in the Aldrich Mountains, central  Oregon. Northwest Science 48(l):29-37.
    17. Furniss, R. L., and V. M. Carolin. 1977. Western forest insects. U.S.  Department of Agriculture, Miscellaneous Publication 1339. Washington,  DC. 654 p.
    19. Harris, A. S. 1969. Alaska-cedar, a bibliography with abstracts. USDA  Forest Service, Research Paper PNW-73. Pacific Northwest Forest and  Range Experiment Station, Portland, OR. 47 p.
    21. Harris, A. S. 1971. Alaska-cedar. American Woods. USDA Forest Service  FS-224. Washington, DC. 7 p.
    23. Harris, A. S. 1974. Chamaecyparis Spach White cedar. In  Seeds of woody plants in the United States. p. 316-320. C. S.  Schopmeyer, tech. coord. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agriculture  Handbook 450. Washington, DC.
    25. Hartman, Kay. 1982. National register of big trees. American Forests  88(4):17-31, 34-48.
    27. Henon, Paul Edward. 1986. Pathological and ecological aspects of  decline and mortality of Chamaecyparis nootkatensis in southeast  Alaska. Thesis (Ph.D.), Oregon State University, Corvallis. 279 p.
    29. Hepting, George H. 1971. Diseases of forest and shade trees of the  United States. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agriculture Handbook 386.  Washington, DC. 658 p.
    31. Jackson, A. Bruce, and W. Dallimore. 1926. A new hybrid conifer.  Royal Botanical Gardens, Miscellaneous Information Bulletin Kew  3:113-115.
    33. Karlsson, 1. 1974. Rooted cuttings of yellow cedar (Chamaecyparis  nootkatensis [D. Don] Spach). British Columbia Forest Service  Research Note 66. Victoria. 4 p.
    35. Krajina, V. J. 1969. Ecology of forest trees in British Columbia.  In Ecology of western North America. vol. 1. p. 1-146. V. J.  Krajina, ed. University of British Columbia, Department of Botany,  Vancouver.
    37. Mitchell, A. F. 1970. A note on two new hybrid cypresses. Journal of  the Royal Horticultural Society London 95(10):453-454.
    39. Neiland, B.J. 1971. The forest-bog complex of southeast Alaska.  Vegetatio 22:1-64.
    41. Owens, J. N., and M. Molder. 1975. Pollination, female gametophyte,  and embryo and seed development in yellow cedar (Chamaecyparis  nootkatensis). Canadian Journal of Botany 53(2):186-199.
    43. Owens, J. N., and M. Molder. 1977. Cone induction in yellow cypress  (Chamaecyparis nootkatensis) by gibberellin A3, and  the subsequent development of seeds within the induced cones. Canadian  Journal of Forest Research 7(4):605-613.
    45. Perry, R. S. 1954. Yellow cedar: its characteristics, properties, and  uses. Canada Department of Northern Affairs and Natural Resources  Forestry Branch, Bulletin 114. Ottawa. 19 P.
    47. Smith, R. S., and A. J. Cserjesi. 1970. Degradation of nootkatin by  fungi causing black heartwood stain in yellow cedar. Canadian Journal of  Botany 48(10):1727-1729.
    49. Viereck, Leslie A., and C. T. Dyrness. 1980. A preliminary  classification system for vegetation of Alaska. USDA Forest Service,  General Technical Report PNW-106. Pacific Northwest Forest and Range  Experiment Station, Portland, OR. 38 p.
    51. Zobel, Donald B., and Joseph A. Antos. 1982. Adventitious rooting of  eight conifers into a volcanic tephra deposit. Canadian Journal of  Forest Research 12:717-719.


EOL content is automatically assembled from many different content providers. As a result, from time to time you may find pages on EOL that are confusing.

To request an improvement, please leave a comment on the page. Thank you!