New York Metropolitan Flora

Genus: Liquidambar

Liquidambar styraciflua

Liquidambar styraciflua L.

Sweet-Gum

By Steven D. Glenn & Angela Steward

Not peer reviewed

Last Modified 02/15/2013

Back to Hamamelidaceae

Nomenclature

Liquidambar L., Sp. Pl. 2: 999. 1753. Gen. Pl., ed. 5, 434. 1754. LECTOTYPE: Liquidambar styraciflua L. Wilson (1905).

Key to the species of Liquidambar

List of Liquidambar Species

Liquidambar styraciflua

References to Liquidambar

  • Anderson, E.; Sax, K. 1935. Chromosome numbers in the Hamamelidaceae and their phylogenetic significance. J. Arnold Arbor. 16: 210-5.
  • Angelov, M. N. et.al. 1996. Long- and short-term flooding effects on survival and sink-source relationships of swamp-adapted tree species. Tree Physiology 16: 477-484.
  • Baillon, H. 1871. Saxifragacees. Hist. Pl. 3: 325-464. (In French; see English translation by M.M. Hartog, Nat. Hist. Pl. 3: 323-464. 1874)
  • Battaglia, L. L.; Fore, S. A.; Sharitz, R. R. 2000. Seedling emergence, survival and size in relation to light and water availability in two bottomland hardwood species. J. Ecol. 88: 1041-1050.
  • Berry, E. W. 1920. The geological history of the sweet gum and witch hazel. Pl. World 22: 345-54.
  • Bogle, A. L. 1986. The floral morphology and vascular anatomy of the Hamamelidaceae: subfamily Liquidambaroideae. Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard. 73: 325-47.
  • Bonner, F. T. 1967. Germination of sweetgum seed in response to light. J. Forest. 65(5): 339.
  • Bormann, F. H. 1953. Factors determining the role of loblolly pine and sweetgum in early old-field succession in the Piedmont of North Carolina. Ecol. Monogr. 23: 339-58.
  • Britton, Elizabeth G. 1887. Elongation of the inflorescence in Liquidambar. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club 14: 95-6.
  • Brown, C. L.; Kormanik, P. P. 1967. Suppressed buds on lateral roots of Liquidambar styraciflua. Bot. Gaz. 128(3-4): 208-11.
  • Chang, K. T. 1959. The pollen morphology of Liquidambar L. and Altinga Nor. Bot. Zhurn. (Moscow & Lenengrad) 44: 1375-80. (In Russian; English summary)
  • Clatterbuck, W. K.; Hodges, J. D. 1988. Development of cherrybark oak and sweet gum in mixed, even-aged bottomland stands in central Mississippi, U.S.A. Canad. J. Forest Res. 18(1): 12-8.
  • Coladoanto, M. 1992. Liquidambar styraciflua. ()
  • De Steven, D. 1991. Experiments on mechanisms of tree establishment in old-field succession: seedling emergence. Ecology 72: 1066-75.
  • De Steven, D. 1991. Experiments on mechanisms of tree establishment in old-field succession: seedling survival and growth. Ecology 72: 1076-88.
  • Den Uyl, D. 1962. Survival and growth of hardwood plantations on strip mine spoil banks of Indiana. J. Forest. 60(9): 603-6.
  • Dillenburg, L. R. 1991. Competitive interactions between the vines Lonicera japonica or Parthenocissus quinquefolia and the tree host Liquidambar styraciflua- effects and mechanisms. Ph.D. Dissertation Univ. Maryland, College Park, MD,
  • Dillenburg, L. R.; Sullivan, J. H.; Teramura, A. H. 1995. Leaf expansion and development of photosynthetic capacity and pigments in Liquidambar styraciflua (Hamamelidaceae)- effects of UV-B radiation. Amer. J. Bot. 82(7): 878-85.
  • Dillenburg, L. R.; Teramura, A. H.; Forseth, I. N.; Whigham, D. F. 1995. Photosynthetic and biomass allocation responses of Liquidambar styraciflua (Hamamelidaceae) to vine competition. Amer. J. Bot. 82(4): 454-61.
  • Dillenburg, L. R.; Whigham, D. F.; Teramura, A. H.; Forseth, I. N. 1993. Effects of vine competition of availability of light, water, and nitrogen to a tree host Liquidambar styraciflua. Amer. J. Bot. 80: 244-52.
  • Dillenburg, L. R.; Whigham, D. F.; Teramura, A. H.; Forseth, I. N. 1993. Effects of below and above ground competition from the vines Lonicera japonica and Parthenocissus quinquefolia on the growth of the tree host Liquidambar styraciflua. Oecologia 93: 48-54.
  • Duncan, W. H. 1959. Leaf variation in Liquidambar styraciflua. Castanea 24: 99-111.
  • Echternach, J. L.; Rose, R. K. 1987. Use of woody vegetation by beavers in southeastern Virginia USA. Virginia J. Sci. 38: 226-232.
  • Ernst, W. R. 1963. The genera of Hamamelidaceae and Platanaceae in the southeastern United States. J. Arnold Arbor. 44: 193-210.
  • Felter, H. W. 1922. The Eclectic Materia Medica, pharmacology and therapeutics (Liquidambar).
  • Flint, F. F. 1959. Development of the megagametophyte in Liquidambar styraciflua L. Madrono 15: 25-9.
  • Fordham, A. J. 1961. Propagation of Liquidambar styraciflua. Arnoldia (Jamaica Plain) 21: 66.
  • Gibson, H. H. 1905. American forest trees - 18. Red gum, Liquidambar styraciflua L. Hardwood Rec. 20: 12-5.
  • Goldblatt, P.; Endress, P. 1977. Cytology and evolution in Hamamelidaceae. J. Arnold Arbor. 58(1): 67-71.
  • Gregory, E. L. 1888. Development of corky-wings on certain trees II. Bot. Gaz. 13: 281-7.
  • Hallier, H. 1903. Uber den Umfang, die Gliederung und die Verwandtschaft der Hamamelidaceen. Beih. Bot. Centralbl. 14: 247-60.
  • Hengst, G. E.; Dawson, J. O. 1994. Bark properties and fire resistance of selected tree species from the central hardwood region of North America. Canad. J. Forest Res. 24: 688-96.
  • Herrick, J. D.; Thomas, R. B. 2003. Leaf senescence and late-season net photosynthesis of sun and shade leaves of overstory sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua) grown in elevated and ambient carbon dioxide concentrations. Tree Physiology 23: 109-118.
  • Hoey, M. T.; Parks, C. R. 1994. Genetic diversity in Liquidambar styraciflua, L. formosana, and L. acalycina (Hamamelidaceae). Syst. Bot. 19(2): 308-16.
  • Hoey, M. T.; Parks, C. R. 1991. Isozyme divergence between eastern Asian, North American, and Turkish species of Liquidambar (Hamamelidaceae). Amer. J. Bot. 78: 938-47.
  • Holbrook, N. M.; Putz, F. E. 1989. Influence of neighbors on tree form: Effects of lateral shade and prevention of sway on the allometry of Liquidambar styraciflua (Sweet Gum). Amer. J. Bot. 76(12): 1740-9.
  • Holm, T. 1930. Leaf-variation in Liquidambar styraciflua. Rhodora 32: 95-100.
  • Hosner, J. F. 1958. The effects of complete inundation upon seedlings of six bottomland tree species. Ecology 39: 371-3.
  • Ickert-Bond, S. M.; Pigg, K. B.; Wen, J. 2005. Comparative infructescence morphology in Liquidambar (Altingiaceae) and its evolutionary significance. Amer. J. Bot. 92: 1234-1255.
  • Jones, R. H. et al. et.al. 1994. Woody plant regeneration in four floodplain forests. Ecol. Monogr. 64: 345-67.
  • King, B. L. 1997. An abnormal variant of sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua L.) from Caroline county, Virginia. Banisteria 9: 43-5.
  • Kirchheimer, F. 1947. Uber verweigte Fruchtstande der Liquidambar styraciflua L. Planta 35: 106-9.
  • Knapp, A. K.; Carter, G. A. 1998. Variability in leaf optical properties among 26 species from a broad range of habitats. Amer. J. Bot. 85: 940-946.
  • Kormanik, P. P.; Brown, C. L. 1967. Root buds and the development of root suckers in sweetgum. Forest Sci. 13: 338-45.
  • Kormanik, P. P.; Brown, C. L. 1969. Origin and development of epicormic branches in sweet gum.
  • Kostel-Hughes, F.; Young, T. P.; Carreiro, M. M.; Wehr, J. D. 1996. Experimental effects of urban and rural forest leaf litter on germination and seedling growth of native and exotic northeastern tree species. (Abstract)
  • Kostel-Hughes, F.; Young, T. P.; Wehr, J. D. 2005. Effects of leaf litter depth on the emergence and seedling growth of deciduous forest tree species in relation to seed size. J. Torrey Bot. Soc. 132: 50-61.
  • Lam, O. C.; Brown, C. L. 1974. Shoot growth and histogenesis of Liquidambar styraciflua L. under different photoperiods. Bot. Gaz. 135(2): 149-54.
  • Li, J.; Bogle, A. L.; Klein, A. S. 1997. Interspecific relationships and genetic divergence of the disjunct genus Liquidambar (Hamamelidaceae) inferred from DNA sequences of plastid gene MATK. Rhodora 99: 229-40.
  • Li, J.; Donoghue, M. J. 1999. More molecular evidence for interspecific relationships in Liquidambar (Hamamelidaceae). Rhodora 101: 87-91.
  • Makarova, Z. I. 1957. A contribution to the history of the genus Liquidambar L. Bot. Zhurn. (Moscow & Lenengrad) 42: 1182-95. (In Russian)
  • Martin, P. S.; Harrell, B. E. 1957. The Pleistocene history of temperate biotas in Mexico and eastern United States. Ecology 38: 468-80.
  • Martindale, D. 1958. Silvical characteristics of sweetgum (Liquidambar syraciflua L.).
  • McApline, R. G. 1961. Yellow-poplar seedlings intolerant to flooding J. Forest. 59(8): 566-8. (Also Fraxinus & Liquidambar)
  • McMillan, C. 1974. Differentiation in habitat response in Taxodium distichum, T. nucronatum, Platanus occidentalis, and Liquidambar styraciflua from the United States and Mexico. Vegetatio 29: 1-10.
  • McMillan, C.; Winstead, J. E. 1976. Adaptive differentiation in Liquidambar styraciflua L. from eastern United States and northeastern Mexico under uniform environmental conditions. Bot. Gaz. 137(4): 361-7.
  • Mitchell, R. S. (eds.) (1988): 1988. Platanaceae through Myricaceae of New York State. New York State Museum Bull. No. 464. The University of the State of New York, the State Education Department, Albany. , 98 pages.
  • Moore, J. E.; Lacey, E. P. 2009. A comparison of germination and early growth of four early successional tree species of the southeastern United States in different soil and water regimes. Amer. Midl. Naturalist 162: 388-394.
  • O'Byrne, J. W. 1952. Sweet gum (Liquidambar styraciflua L.). Va. Forests 7(5): 3,14.
  • Pope, P. E.; Chaney, W. R.; Rhodes, J. D.; Woodhead, S. H. 1983. The mycorrhizal dependency of four hardwood tree species. Canad. J. Bot. 61: 412-7.
  • Rabe, E. P. 1985. Distribution and growth response of Ailanthus altissima in the urban environment. M.S. Thesis Cornell Univ., Ithaca, NY87 p. (Also Acer & Liquidambar)
  • Randel, W. R.; Winstead, J. E. 1976. Environmental influence on cell and wood characters of Liquidambar styraciflua. Bot. Gaz. 137(1): 45-51.
  • Rao, P. R. M. 1974. Seed anatomy in some Hamamelidaceae and phylogeny. Phytomorphology 24: 113-39.
  • Rhoads, A. F.; Meyer, P. W.; Sanfelippo, R. 1981. Performance of urban street trees evaluated. J. Arboric. 7: 127-132.
  • Roberts, B. R. 1980. Trees as biological filters. J. Arboric. 6(1): 20-3. (Sulphur dioxide & ozone)
  • Samorodova-Bianki, G. B. 1957. De genera Liquidambar L. notulae systematicae. Bot. Mater. Gerb. Glavn. Bot. Sada SSSR 18: 77-89. (In Russian)
  • Santamour, F. S. 1972. Chromosome number in Liquidambar. Rhodora 74(798): 287-90.
  • Santamour, F. S.; McArdle, A. J. 1984. Cultivar checklist for Liqiudambar and Liriodendron. J. Arboric. 10: 309-312.
  • Sargent, C. S. 1889. The Liquidambar. Gard. & Forest 2: 232-3.
  • Schmitt, D. 1966. Pistillate inflorescence of sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua L.). Silvae Genet. 15: 33-5.
  • Sharma, G. K.; Tyree, J. 1973. Geographic leaf cuticular and gross morphological variations in Liquidambar styraciflua L. and their possible relationship to environmental pollution. Bot. Gaz. 134(3): 179-84.
  • Sionit, N. et al. et.al. 1985. Long term atmospheric CO2 enrichment affects the growth and development of Liquidambar styraciflua and Pinus taeda seedlings. Canad. J. Forest Res. 15: 468-71.
  • Smith, R. F. 1967. The leaf dimorphism of Liquidambar styraciflua. Amer. Midl. Naturalist 77: 42-50.
  • Sullivan, J. H.; Teramura, A. H.; Dillenburg, L. R. 1994. Growth and photosynthetic responses of field-grown sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua; Hamamelidaceae) seedlings to UV-B radiation. Amer. J. Bot. 81(7): 826-32.
  • Thomas, J. L. 1961. Liquidambar. Arnoldia (Jamaica Plain) 21: 59-65.
  • Tolley, L. C.; Strain, B. R. 1984. Effects of CO2 enrichment and water stress on growth of Liquidambar styraciflua and Pinus taeda seedlings. Canad. J. Bot. 62: 2135-9.
  • Trenk, F. B. 1925. Some soil and moisture relationships of sweetgum and river birch in southern Maryland. Proc. Iowa Acad. Sci. 32: 133-42.
  • Vozzo, J. A.; Hacskaylo, E. 1964. Anatomy of mycorrhizae of selected eastern forest trees. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club 91: 378-387.
  • Whigham, D. 1984. The influence of vines on the growth of Liquidambar styraciflua L. (sweetgum). Canad. J. Forest Res. 14: 37-9.
  • Williams, G. J.; McMillan, C. 1971. Phenology of six United States provenances of Liquidambar styraciflua under controlled conditions. Amer. J. Bot. 58(1): 24-31.
  • Williams, G. J.; McMillan, C. 1971. Frost tolerance of Liquidambar styraciflua native to the United States, Mexico, and Central America. Canad. J. Bot. 49: 1551-8.
  • Wilson, P. 1905. Altingiaceae. N. Amer. Fl. 22: 189.
  • Winstead, J. E. 1969. Ecotypic differentiation in Liquidambar styraciflua L. Ph.D. Dissertation University of Texas, Austin, TX,
  • Winstead, J. E. 1971. Populational differences in seed germination and stratification requirements of sweetgum. Forest Sci. 17: 34-6.
  • Wisniewski, M.; Bogle, A. L. 1982. The ontogeny of the inflorescence and flower of Liquidambar styraciflua L. (Hamamelidaceae). Amer. J. Bot. 69(10): 1612-24.