New York Metropolitan Flora

Genus: Fagus

By Steven D. Glenn

Not peer reviewed

Last Modified 01/25/2013

Back to Fagaceae

Nomenclature

Fagus L., Sp. Pl. 997. 1753, sp. nonnull. exclud.

Fagus sect. Eufagus A.DC., Prodr. 16,2: 118. 1864, p. p. typ.

LECTOTYPE: F. sylvatica L. (see Britton & A.Br., Ill. Fl. N.U.S. ed. 2. 1: 614. 1913).

Key to the species of Fagus

1. Leaves serrate, with 9-14 pairs of veins...Fagus grandifolia

1. Leaves crenate, with 5-9 pairs of veins...Fagus sylvatica

List of Fagus Species

Fagus grandifolia Fagus sylvatica

References to Fagus

  • Abrell, D. B.; Jackson, M. T. 1977. A decade of change in an old-growth beech-maple forest in Indiana. Amer. Midl. Naturalist 98: 22-32.
  • Amthor, J. S.; Gill, D. S.; Bormann, F. H. 1990. Autumnal laef conductance and apparent photosythesis by saplings and sprouts in a recently disturbed northern hardwood forest. Oecologia 84: 93-8.
  • Aufderheide, H. 1931. Chromosome numbers in Fagus grandifolia and Quercus virginiana. Butler Univ. Bot. Stud. 2(5): 45-52.
  • Barden, L. S. 1983. Size, age, and growth rate of trees in canopy gaps of a cove hardwood forest in the southern Appalachians. Castanea 48: 19-23.
  • Barker, M. J. et.al. 1997. Micropropagation of juvenile and mature American beech. Plant Cell Tissue and Organ Culture 51: 209-213.
  • Barrett, J. W.; Farnsworth, C. E.; Rutherford, W. Jr. 1962. Logging effects on regeneration and certain aspects of microclimate in northern hardwoods. J. Forest. 60(9): 630-9.
  • Batista, W. B.; Platt, W. J.; Macchiavelli, R. E. 1998. Demography of a shade-tolerant tree (Fagus grandifolia) in a hurricane-disturbed forest. Ecology 79: 38-53.
  • Beaudet, M.; Messier, C. 1998. Growth and morphological responses of yellow birch, sugar maple and beech seedlings growing under a natural light gradient. Canad. J. Forest Res. 28: 1007-1015.
  • Bennett, K. D. 1985. The spread of Fagus grandifolia across eastern North America during the last 18000 years. J. Biogeogr. 12: 147-64.
  • Benninghoff, W. S.; Gebben, A. I. 1960. Phytosociological studies of some beech-maple stands in Michigan's Lower Peninsula. Pap. Michigan Acad. Sci. 45: 83-91.
  • Berkeley, E. E. 1931. Marcescent leaves of certain species of Quercus. Bot. Gaz. 92: 85-93. (Also Acer, Fagus)
  • Boerner, R. E. J.; Brinkman, J. A. 1996. Ten years of tree seedling establishment and mortality in an Ohio deciduous forest complex. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club 123: 309-17.
  • Bohn, K. K.; Nyland, R. D. 2003. Forecasting development of understory American beech after partial cutting in uneven-aged northern hardwood stands. Forest Ecol. & Manag. 180: 453-461.
  • Boman, J. S.; Casper, B. B. 1995. Differential postdispersal seed predation in disturbed and intact temperate forest. Amer. Midl. Naturalist 134: 107-116.
  • Brett, D. W. 1964. The inflorescence of Fagus and Castanea and the evolution of the cupules of the Fagaceae. New Phyt. 63: 96-117.
  • Bruederle, L. P.; Stearns, F. W. 1985. Ice storm damage to a southern Wisconsin mesic forest. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club 112(2): 167-75.
  • Buell, M. F.; Buell, H. F.; Small, J. A. 1973. Periodicity of tree growth in Hutcheson Memorial Forest. William L. Hutcheson Memorial For. Bull. 3: 24-6.
  • Busby, P. E. et.al. 2008. Multiple and interacting disturbances lead to Fagus grandifolia dominance in coastal New England. J. Torrey Bot. Soc. 135: 346-359.
  • Busby, P. E. et.al. 2009. Distribution and dynamics of American beech in coastal southern New England. Northeastern Naturalist 16: 159-176.
  • Camp, W. H. 1950. A biogeographic and paragenetic analysis of the American beech (Fagus). Amer. Philos. Soc. Year Book 1950: 166-9.
  • Canham, C. D. 1990. Suppression and release during canopy recruitment in Fagus grandifolia. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club 117: 1-7. (Also Acer)
  • Canham, C. D. 1988. Growth and canopy architecture of shade-tolerant trees: Response to canopy gaps. Ecology 69: 786-95.
  • Canham, C. D. 1984. Canopy recruitment in shade tolerant tree species: the response of Acer saccharum and Fagus grandifolia to canopy openings. Ph.D. Thesis Cornell Univ., Ithaca, NY174 p.
  • Celakovsky, L. 1890. Ueber die Cupula von Fagus und Castanea. Jahrb. Wiss. Bot. 21: 128-161. (In German)
  • Chadwick, L. C. 1939. New England hurricane damage to trees. Arborist's News 4(1): 1-4.
  • Clark, A. W. 1919. Seasonal variation in water content and in transpiration of leaves of Fagus grandifolia, Hamamelis virginiana, and Quercus alba. Contr. Bot. Lab. Morris Abor. Univ. Pennsylvania 4: 105-43.
  • Cleavitt, N. L. et.al. 2008. Growth and survivorship of american beech (Fagus grandifolia Ehrh.) seedlings in a northern hardwood forest following a mast event. J. Torrey Bot. Soc. 135: 328-345.
  • Coladoanto, M. 1991. Fagus grandifolia. ()
  • Cooper, A. W.; Mercer, E. P. 1977. Morphological variation in Fagus grandifolia Ehrh. in North Carolina. J. Elisha Mitchell Sci. Soc. 93: 136-49.
  • Curtis, R. O.; Rushmore, F. M. 1958. Some effects of stand density and deer browsing on reproduction in an Adirondack hardwood stand. J. Forest. 56: 116-21.
  • Cypher, J.; Boucher, D. H. 1982. Beech-maple coexistence and seedling growth rates at Mount Saint Hilaire, Quebec. Canad. J. Bot. 60: 1279-81.
  • Davis, M. B.; Woods, K. D.; Webb, S. L.; Futyma, R. P. 1986. Dispersal versus climate: expansion of Fagus and Tsuga into the upper Great Lakes region. Vegetatio 67: 93-103.
  • Dengler, N. G.; MacKay, L. B. 1975. The leaf anatomy of beech, Fagus grandifolia. Canad. J. Bot. 53(19): 2202-11.
  • Dengler, N. G.; MacKay, L. B.; Gregory, L. M. 1975. Cell enlargement and tissue differentiation during leaf expansion in beech, Fagus grandifolia. Canad. J. Bot. 53(23): 2846-65.
  • Denk, T. 2003. Phylogeny of Fagus L. (Fagaceae) based on morphological data. Pl. Syst. Evol. 240: 55-81.
  • Denk, T.; Grimm, G. W.; Hemleben, V. 2005. Patterns of molecular and morphological differentiation in Fagus (Fagaceae): phylogenetic implications. Amer. J. Bot. 92: 1006-1016.
  • Denk, T.; Meller, B. 2001. Systematic significance of the cupule/nut complex in living and fossil Fagus. Int. J. Plant Sci. 162: 869-897.
  • Dibello, F. J.; Arthur, S. M.; Krohn, W. B. 1990. Food habits of sympatric coyotes, red foxes, and bobcats in Maine. Canad. Field-Naturalist 104: 403-8.
  • Diller, O. D. 1935. The relation of temperature and precipitation to the growth of beech in northern Indiana. Ecology 16: 72-81.
  • Dix, R. L.; Skrentny, R. F. 1965. Reproduction of Fagus grandifolia Ehrh. by seed in Wisconsin. Canad. J. Bot. 43: 757-63.
  • Dostal, R. 1927. Uber die Sommerperiodizitõt bei Quercus und Fagus. Ber. Deutsch. Bot. Ges. 45: 436-446.
  • Elias, T. S. 1971. The genera of Fagaceae in the southeastern United States. J. Arnold Arbor. 52: 159-95.
  • Evans, C. A. et.al. 2005. Beech bark disease: proceedings of the beech bark disease symposium, Saranac Lake, New York, June 16-18, 2004. (149 pages)
  • Fey, B. S.; Endress, P. K. 1983. Development and morphological interpretation of the cupule in Fagaceae. Flora 173: 451-468.
  • Forcier, L. K. 1973. Seedling pattern and population dynamics, and the reproductive strategies of sugar maple, beech and yellow birch. Ph.D. Dissertation Yale Univ., New Haven, CT,
  • Forman, L. L. 1966. On the evolution of cupules in the Fagaceae. Kew Bull. 18: 385-419.
  • Friesner, R. C. 1941. A preliminary study of growth in the beech, Fagus grandifolia, by the dendrographic method. Butler Univ. Bot. Stud. 5: 85-94.
  • Fritts, H. C. 1958. An analysis of radial growth of beech in a central Ohio forest during 1954-55. Ecology 39: 705-20.
  • Fritts, H. C. 1959. The relation of radial growth to maximum and minimum temperatures in three tree species. Ecology 40(2): 261-5.
  • Fritts, H. C. 1956. Relations of radial growth of beech (Fagus grandifolia Ehrh.) to some environmental factors in a central Ohio forest during 1954-55. Ph.D. Dissertation Ohio State Univ., Columbus, OH,
  • Garrison, H. J. 1956. Floral morphology and ontogeny of Fagus grandifloia Ehrh. Ph.D. Thesis Pennsylvania State Univ.101 p. (see also Diss. Abstr. 17:2777-2778. 1957.)
  • Gavin, D. 1992. Effects of beech bark disease on radial growth of American beech (Fagus grandifolia Ehrh.) in New Hampshire. M.S. Thesis Dartmouth,
  • Glase, J. C.; Granet, K. 1978. Bark chlorophyll in the American beech (Fagus grandifolia) varies with bark aspect. Amer. Midl. Naturalist 100: 510-2.
  • Good, N. F. 1968. A study of natural replacement of chestnut in six stands in the highlands of New Jersey. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club 95: 240-53. (Also Acer, Betula, & Fagus)
  • Good, N. F.; Good, R. E. 1972. Population dynamics of tree seedlings and saplings in a mature eastern hardwood forest. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club 99: 172-8.
  • Greene, D. F.; Johnson, E. A. 1994. Estimating the mean annual seed production of trees. Ecology 75: 642-7.
  • Gysel, L. W. 1971. A 10-year analysis of beechnut production and use in Michigan. J. Wildl. Managem. 35: 516-9.
  • Haines, E. M. 1965. The distribution of Fagus grandifolia in Hutcheson Memorial Forest, New Jersey. Bull. New Jersey Acad. Sci. 10: 12-21.
  • Hane, E. N. 2003. Indirect effects of beech bark disease on sugar maple seedling survival. Canad. J. Forest Res. 33: 807-813.
  • Hane, E. N. et.al. 2003. Phytotoxicity of American beech leaf leachate to sugar maple seedlings in a greenhouse experiment. Canad. J. Forest Res. 33: 814-821.
  • Hanna, W. J.; Grant, C. L. 1962. Spectrochemical analysis of the foliage of certain trees and ornamentals for 23 elements. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club 89: 293-302.
  • Hannah, P. R. 1987. Potential of beech and striped maple to dominate regeneration on eastern hardwood sites. In: Proceedings of the Central Hardwood Forest Conference, February 24-26, 1987, Knoxville, Tennessee. Univ. Tennessee, Knoxville, TN. , 511-2 pages.
  • Harcombe, P. A.; White, B. D.; Glitzenstein, J. S. 1982. Factors influencing distribution and first-year survivorship of a cohort of beech (Fagus grandifolia Ehrh.). Castanea 47: 148-57.
  • Hardin, J. W.; Johnson, G. P. 1985. Atlas of foliar surface features in woody plants, VIII. Fagus and Castanea (Fagaceae) of eastern North America. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club 112: 11-20.
  • Held, M. E. 1983. Pattern of beech regeneration in the east-central United States. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club 110: 55-62.
  • Held, M. E. 1978. Multivariate analysis of the relationship between environmental variables and reproduction in Fagus grandifolia. Bull. Ecol. Soc. Amer. 59: 78.
  • Held, M. E. 1980. An analysis of factors related to sprouting and seeding in the occurrence of Fagus grandifolia Ehrh. (American Beech) in the eastern deciduous forest of North America. Ph.D. Dissertation Ohio Univ., Athens, OH,
  • Held, M. E.; Jones Held, S. 1990. Morphological and flavonoid analysis of variation in Fagus grandifolia (Fagaceae). Trans. Kentucky Acad. Sci. 51(1-2): 57-60.
  • Held, M. E.; Wistendahl, W. A. 1977. An analysis of factors related to reproduction from sprouts and seeds in the occurrence of Fagus grandifolia Ehrh. (American Beech) in Ohio and Kentucky. Bull. Ecol. Soc. Amer. 58: 47.
  • Henry, J. D.; Swan, J. M. A. 1974. Reconstructing forest history from live and dead plant material - an approach to the study of forest succession in southwest New Hampshire. Ecology 55: 772-83.
  • Hobart-Hampden, A. G. 1933. Notes on beech regeneration. Quart. J. Forest. 27: 18-27.
  • Hornbeck, J. W.; Smith, R. B.; Federer, C. A. 1988. Growth trends in 10 species of trees in New England, 1950-1980. Canad. J. Forest Res. 18: 1337-40.
  • Hough, A. F.; Forbes, R. D. 1943. The ecology and silvics of forests in the high plateaus of Pennsylvania. Ecol. Monogr. 13: 299-320.
  • Houle, G. 1994. Spatiotemporal patterns in the components of regeneration of four sympatric tree species- Acer rubrum, A. saccharum, Betula allegheniensis, and Fagus grandifolia. J. Ecol. 82: 39-54.
  • Houston, D. B.; Houston, D. R. 1994. Variation in American beech (Fagus grandifolia Ehrh.) isozyme analysis of genetic structure in selected stands. Silvae Genet. 43: 277-284.
  • Houston, D. B.; Houston, D. R. 2000. Allozyme genetic diversity among Fagus grandifolia trees resistant or susceptible to beech bark disease in natural populations. Canad. J. Forest Res. 30: 778-789.
  • Houston, D. R. 1985. Dieback and declines of urban trees. J. Arboric. 11(3): 65-72.
  • Hughes, J. W.; Fahey, T. J. 1988. Seed dispersal and colonization in a disturbed northern hardwood forest. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club 115: 89-99.
  • Illick, J. S. 1922. The beeches. Amer. Forests 28: 546-51.
  • Jackson, B. D. 1910. A note on nomenclature. J. Bot. 34: 352-3.
  • Jaynes, R. A. (eds.) (1969): 1969. Handbook of North American nut trees. Northern Nut Growers Association, Knoxville, TN. , 421 pages.
  • Jester, J. R.; Kramer, P. J. 1939. The effect of length of day on the height growth of certain forest tree seedlings. J. Forest. 37(10): 796-803.
  • Johnson, W. C.; Adkisson, C. S. 1985. Dispersal of beech (Fagus grandifolia) nuts by blue jays (Cyanocitta cristata) in fragmented landscapes. Amer. Midl. Naturalist 113: 319-24.
  • Jones, R. H.; Raynal, D. J. 1987. Root sprouting in American beech: Production, survival,and the effect of parent vigor. Canad. J. Forest Res. 17: 539-44.
  • Jones, R. H.; Raynal, D. J. 1987. Factors influencing the initiation of root sprouts in American beech (Fagus grandifolia Ehrh.). Proc. Rochester Acad. Sci. 16(3): 103.
  • Jones, R. H.; Raynal, D. J. 1988. Root sprouting in American beech (Fagus grandifolia): effects of root injury, root exposure, and season. Forest Ecol. & Manag. 25: 79-90.
  • Jones, R. H.; Raynal, D. J. 1986. Spatial distribution and development of root sprouts in Fagus grandifolia (Fagaceae). Amer. J. Bot. 73: 1723-31.
  • Jurik, T. W. 1986. Temporal and spatial patterns of specific leaf weight in successional northern hardwood tree species. Amer. J. Bot. 73(8): 1083-92.
  • Jurik, T. W.; Weber, J. A.; Gates, D. M. 1988. Effects of temperature and light on photosynthesis of dominant species of a northern hardwood forest. Bot. Gaz. 149: 203-8.
  • Kasmer, J.; Kasmer, P.; Ware, S. 1984. Edaphic factors and vegetation in the piedmont lowland of southeastern Pennsylvania. Castanea 49: 147-57.
  • Keever, C. 1973. Distribution of major forest species in southeastern Pennsylvania. Ecol. Monogr. 43: 303-27.
  • Kitamura, K. et.al. 2000. Demographic genetic analyses of the American beech (Fagus grandifolia Ehrh.) I. Genetic substructurings of northern populations with root suckers in Quebec and Pennsylvania. Plant Species Biol. 15: 43-58.
  • Kitamura, K.; Kawano, S. 2001. Regional differentiation in genetic components for the American beech, Fagus grandifolia Ehrh., in relation to geological history and mode of reproduction. J. Pl. Res. 114: 353-368.
  • 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.
  • Lacki, M. J. 1985. Variation in radial growth of American beech (Fagus grandifolia Ehrh.) at high elevations in the Great Smoky Mountains. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club 112: 398-402.
  • Lamont, M. L. 1994. The maritime dwarf beech forest on Long Island, New York. Long Island Botanical Society Newsletter 4: 33-4.
  • Langdon, L. M. 1939. Ontogenetic and anatomical studies of the flower and fruit of the Fagaceae and Juglandaceae. Bot. Gaz. 101: 301-327.
  • Latham, R. E. 1992. Co-occurring tree species change rank in seedling performance with resources varied experimentally. Ecology 73: 2129-44.
  • Lawrey, J. D. 1977. Trace metal accumulation by plant species from a coal strip-mining area in Ohio. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club 104: 368-375.
  • Leak, W. B. 1975. Age distribution in virgin red spruce and northern hardwoods. Ecology 56(6): 1451-4.
  • Lemon, P. C. 1961. Forest ecology of ice storms. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club 88(1): 21-9.
  • Liu, Y.; Muller, R. N. 1993. Effect of drought and frost on radial growth of overstory and understory stems in a deciduous forest. Amer. Midl. Naturalist 129: 19-25.
  • Loach, K. 1970. Shade tolerance in tree seedlings. II. Growth analysis of plants raised under artificial shade. New Phyt. 69: 273-86.
  • Loach, K. 1967. Shade tolerance in tree seedlings. I. Leaf photosynthesis and respiration in plants raised under artificial shade. New Phyt. 66: 607-21.
  • Logan, K. T. 1973. Growth of tree seedlings as affected by light intensity V. White ash, beech, eastern hemlock, and general conclusions.
  • Long Island Botanical Society Flora Committee. 2001. Preliminary Atlas of the Fagaceae of Long Island, New York. Long Island Botanical Society Newsletter 11: 1, 6-9.
  • MacDonald, A. D. 1979. Inception of the cupule of Quercus macrocarpa and Fagus grandifolia. Canad. J. Bot. 57: 1777-82.
  • Manos, P. S.; Stanford, A. M. 2001. The historical biogeography of Fagaceae: tracking the Tertiary history of temperate and subtropical forests of the Northern Hemisphere. Int. J. Plant Sci. 162: S77-S93.
  • Marks, P. L. 1975. On the relation between extension growth and successional status of deciduous trees of the northeastern United States. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club 102: 172-7.
  • Marks, P. L.; Gardescu, S.; Hitzhusen, G. E. 1999. Windstorm damage and age structure in an old growth forest in central New York. Northeastern Naturalist 6: 165-176.
  • Melancon, S.; Lechowicz, M. J. 1987. Differences in the damage caused by glaze ice on co-dominant Acer saccharum and Fagus grandifolia. Canad. J. Bot. 65: 1157-9.
  • Meurer-Grimes, B. 1995. New evidence for the systematic significance of acylated spermidines and flavonoids in pollen of higher Hamamelidae. Brittonia 47(2): 130-42.
  • Millet, J. et.al. 1998. Plagiotropic architectural development of four tree species of the temperate forest. Canad. J. Bot. 76: 2100-2118.
  • Moore, T. R.; DuBreuil, M. A. 1987. The neutralization of acid precipitation by beech and maple stands in southern Quebec. Naturaliste Canad. 114(4): 449-57.
  • Morris, A. B.; Small, R. L.; Cruzan, M. B. 2004. Variation in frequency of clonal reproduction among populations of Fagus grandifolia Ehrh. in response to disturbance. Castanea 69: 38-51.
  • Northeastern Center for Forest Health Research. 1996. Northern hardwoods- beech and maple. ()
  • Oh, K. C. 1965. The sampling, pattern, and survival of the higher elevation beech in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park. Ph.D. Dissertation Univ. Tennessee, Knoxville, TN121 p.
  • Okamoto, M. 1989. New interpretation of the inflorescence of Fagus drawn from the developmental study of Fagus crenata, with description of an extremely monstrous cupule. Amer. J. Bot. 76(1): 14-22.
  • Ostrofsky, W. D.; Blanchard, R. O. 1984. Variation in bark characteristics of American beech (Fagus grandifolia). Canad. J. Bot. 62: 1564-6.
  • Piovesan, G.; Adams, J. M. 2001. Masting behavior in beech: linking reproduction and climatic variation. Canad. J. Bot. 79: 1039-1047.
  • Poage, N. J. 1987. The radial growth response of American beech (Fagus grandifolia) to canopy gaps at the Hubbard Brook Experimental Forest, N.H. , Senior Honors Thesis Dartmouth56 p.
  • Poage, N. J.; Peart, D. R. 1993. The radial growth response of American beech (Fagus grandifolia) to small canopy gaps in a northern hardwood forest. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club 120: 45-8.
  • Poulson, T. L.; Platt, W. J. 1996. Replacement patterns of beech and sugar maple in Warren Woods, Michigan. Ecology 77: 1234-53.
  • Reade, M. G. 1965. Natural regeneration of beech. Quart. J. Forest. 59: 152-161.
  • Reed, C. A.; Morris, R. T. 1924. Why is the American Beech nut not developed? Amer. Nut J. 21: 73.
  • Rehder, A. A. 1907. Some new or little known forms of New England trees. Rhodora 9: 109-17.
  • Reid, C. D.; Strain, B. R. 1994. Effects of CO2 enrichment on whole-plant carbon budget of seedlings of Fagus grandifolia and Acer saccharum in low irradiance. Oecologia 98: 31-9.
  • Rice, H. P. 1948. A rough-barked American beech. J. Forest. 46: 48.
  • Richardson-Calfee, L. E. et.al. 2001. Effects of extended photoperiod and light quality on growth of Carpinus caroliniana, Fagus grandifolia and Gymnocladus dioicus seedlings. J. Environ. Hort. 19: 171-174.
  • Ricklefs, R. E.; Matthew, K. K. 1982. Chemical characteristics of the foliage of some deciduous trees in southeastern Ontario. Canad. J. Bot. 60: 2037-45.
  • Rooney, T. P.; Dress, W. J. 1997. Patterns of plant diversity in overbrowsed primary and mature secondary hemlock-northern hardwood forest stands. J. Torrey Bot. Soc. 124: 43-51.
  • Rowlee, W. W.; Hastings, G. T. 1898. The seeds and seedlings of some Amentiferae. Bot. Gaz. 26: 349-53.
  • Rudolf, P. O. 1929. A study of the seedling root systems of certain forest trees. M.S. Thesis Cornell Univ., Ithaca, NY60 p.
  • Rushmore, F. J. 1961. Silvical characteristics of beech (Fagus grandifolia).
  • Russell, N. H. 1953. The beech gaps of the Great Smoky Mountains. Ecology 34: 366-74.
  • Sain, R. E.; Blum, K. E. 1981. Seedling production in the high-elevation beech (Fagus grandifolia Ehrh.) forests of the Great Smoky Mountains National Park. Castanea 46: 217-24.
  • Sakai, A.; Weiser, C. J. 1973. Freezing resistance of trees in North America with reference to tree regions. Ecology 54: 118-26.
  • Sands, S. 1991. The American beech. Amer. Horticulturist 70(12): 37-9.
  • Sears, P. B. 1942. Postglacial migration of five forest genera. Amer. J. Bot. 29: 684-91.
  • Shigo, A. L. 1972. The beech bark disease today in the northeastern U.S. J. Forest. 70(5): 286-9.
  • Shigo, A. L. 1976. The beech bark disease. J. Arboric. 2(2): 21-5.
  • Solomon, D. S.; Leak, W. B. 1994. Migration of tree species in New England based on elevational and regional analysis.
  • Stalter, R. 1982. Production of viable seed by the American beech (Fagus grandifolia). Bull. Torrey Bot. Club 109: 542-4.
  • Telfer, E. S. 1969. Weight-diameter relationships for 22 woody plant species. Canad. J. Bot. 47: 1851-5.
  • Thomas, R. B. 1982. Invasion of beech into a high elevation bald at Craggy Gardens, North Carolina. M.S. Thesis Western Carolina Univ., Cullowhee, NC57 p.
  • Thomas, R. B.; Pittillo, J. D. 1987. Invasion of Fagus grandifolia Ehrh. into a Rhododendron catawbiense Michx. heath bald at Craggy Gardens, North Carolina. Castanea 52: 157-65.
  • Tobiessen, P.; Werner, M. B. 1980. Hardwood seedling survival under plantations of scotch pine and red pine in central New York. Ecology 61(1): 25-9.
  • Tryon, E. H.; True, R. P. 1968. Radial increment response of Appalachian hardwood species to a spring freeze. J. Forest. 66(6): 488-91.
  • Tryon, E. H.; True, R. P. 1966. Effect of spring freeze on radial increment of American beech at different elevations. J. Forest. 64(9): 625-7.
  • Tyree, M. T.; Cheung, Y. N. S. 1977. Resistance to water flow in Fagus granfifolia leaves. Canad. J. Bot. 55(20): 2591-9.
  • Vozzo, J. A.; Hacskaylo, E. 1964. Anatomy of mycorrhizae of selected eastern forest trees. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club 91: 378-387.
  • Ward, R. T. 1961. Some aspects of the regeneration habits of American beech. Ecology 42: 828-32.
  • Webb, S. L. 1987. Beech range extension and vegetation history: pollen stratigraphy of two wisconsin lakes. Ecology 68: 1993-2005.
  • Wilder, C. M.; Holtzclaw, F . W.; Clebsch, E. E. C. 1999. Succession, sapling density and growth in canopy gaps along a topographic gradient in a second growth east Tennessee forest. Amer. Midl. Naturalist 142: 201-212.
  • Williams, A. B. 1936. The composition and dynamics of a beech-maple climax community. Ecol. Monogr. 6: 319-408.
  • Woods, K. D.; Davis, M. B. 1989. Paleoecology of range limits: beech in the upper peninsula of Michigan. Ecology 70: 681-96.
  • Yetter, T. C.; Runkle, J. R. 1986. Height growth rates of canopy tree species in southern Appalachian gaps. Castanea 51: 157-67.
  • Zimmermann, M. H.; Jeje, A. A. 1981. Vessel-length distribution in stems of some American woody plants. Canad. J. Bot. 59: 1882-1892.