13.10.2013 Views

Tree Improvement Program Project Report 2006 / 2007

Tree Improvement Program Project Report 2006 / 2007

Tree Improvement Program Project Report 2006 / 2007

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

.2.6 Enhanc ng Seed Product on n<br />

North Okanagan Lodgepole<br />

P ne Seed Orchards<br />

(SPU 0719)<br />

Chr s Walsh and Joe Webber<br />

The OTIP SPU 0719 final report for 2005 provided a<br />

complete summary of the lodgepole pine seed set study for<br />

the period of 2000 to 2005. Over that period, the improved<br />

irrigation system did not result in substantial increases<br />

in seed yields, although cone mass and seed weights have<br />

improved. Temperature and drought conditions during<br />

the pre-pollination, pollination, fertilization, and embryo<br />

development periods have not been severe, and soil<br />

moisture content has been adequate. Crown misting has<br />

also not been necessary. Again weather conditions during<br />

the sensitive periods of reproductive development have not<br />

limited either pollen uptake or fertilization and embryo<br />

development.<br />

There is growing concern that both seed yields and<br />

cone numbers are declining over the last three years. This<br />

downward trend is observed across the orchard in general<br />

and is not associated with culture (over-watering) although<br />

over-watering may exaggerate this trend. Lower cone<br />

numbers may be the result of decreasing tree vigour caused<br />

by crown shading that comes from increased tree size. Also,<br />

cone numbers may be dropping because the sampling<br />

points have become increasingly lower in the crown.<br />

Although sampling now considers crown position (high and<br />

low), cone numbers are still declining.<br />

We have no reason to suspect pollen supply (uptake)<br />

as the cause of the decline, especially in the upper crown<br />

seed cones, although pollen supply in the lower crown (in<br />

large trees) may be limiting. Since this orchard is nearing<br />

20 years old, we must suspect the vigour of the trees as a<br />

cause of lower cone and seed production. We also need to<br />

consider whether insect damage to first-year cones after<br />

harvesting can adversely affect yields the following year.<br />

Because the pre- and post-pollination season was not<br />

hot and dry, we abandoned monitoring cultural effects on<br />

seed set. However, we monitored insect damage, pollen<br />

supply to lower crown cones, and weather. Increasing lower<br />

crown pollen supply (control crosses and SMP) did not<br />

improve seed set, and insect losses were in the range of 10<br />

filled seed per cone in upper crown cones. We have noted<br />

that insect seed losses increase with heat. The year <strong>2006</strong> was<br />

2<br />

T R E E I M P R O V E M E N T P R O G R A M<br />

P R O J E C T R E P O R T 2 0 0 6 / 2 0 0 7<br />

relatively cool during the pre- and post-pollination period<br />

but was unusually hot and dry during June and September.<br />

RESULTS<br />

Lower crown pollen supply<br />

We used both control cross pollination and SMP to<br />

determine if pollen supply to lower crown cones was<br />

limiting seed yields. We treated lower crown cones with<br />

SMP in 2005 and then compared them with openpollinated<br />

cones in upper crowns, both with and without<br />

insect protection (bagging). We compared cones treated<br />

with control crossing in the lower crown with OP cones in<br />

both the lower and upper crowns.<br />

Figures 33 and 34 show the effect of SMP on lower<br />

crown cones for both total seed per cone (TSPC) and filled<br />

seed per cone (FSPC). Figures 33 and 34 also show the<br />

effect of insect protection on lower (SMP) and upper crown<br />

cones (OP only). Increasing pollen supply (SMP) to lower<br />

crown cones did not improve either TSPC or FSPC, but<br />

the effect of insect protection is apparent. About 10 FSPC<br />

were lost in the upper crown from insect predation, but the<br />

loss was less than two for lower crown cones.<br />

Figures 35 and 36 show the effect of control cross<br />

pollination on lower crown cones compared to OP<br />

cones in both the upper and lower crowns. There was a<br />

slight decrease in FSPC (about four) from OP cones in<br />

lower compared to upper crown cones, and control cross<br />

pollination did not improve the number of FSPC in the<br />

lower crown.<br />

Meteorolog cal data<br />

Temperature (Tsum) and vapour pressure deficit (VPDsum)<br />

sums are shown for the irrigation block only. Tables 13 to<br />

16 show the meteorological data for four important periods<br />

of reproductive development in lodgepole pine. April to<br />

mid-May represents the period of rapid second-year cone<br />

development and pre-pollination development of the firstyear<br />

cones. The last two weeks of May represent the period<br />

of flowering, pollination, pollen uptake, and early pollen<br />

development (penetration of the nucellus). June represents<br />

the period of fertilization and early embryo development<br />

of the second-year cones, and September is the period of<br />

differentiation of first-year cones (although recent data on<br />

describing the period of seed cone differentiation suggest<br />

that it occurs much earlier).<br />

Heat sums, vapour pressure deficits, and precipitation<br />

vary by year and period of reproductive development.<br />

During pre-pollination, <strong>2006</strong> was an average year with

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!