Tree Improvement Program Project Report 2006 / 2007

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Height growth Figures 57 and 58 show the mean height growth (cm) for all progeny from each of the four parent sources. At the WANSA site (Figure 57), the PG x PG source grew tallest: the difference was less than 1 cm compared to the KAL x KAL source. Growth at PGTIS was significantly less (111 cm compared to 85) with the PG x PG source also growing tallest, but again the difference compared to the KAL x KAL source was about 1 cm. The reciprocals were slightly shorter. PG females crossed with KAL males grew the shortest at WANSA, while at PGTIS, the KAL females crossed with PG males grew the least. While these differences may have biological significance, they are not sufficient to change our current deployment Figure strategy. 1: First- and second-year heights for the seed orchard aftereffects plantation (PGTIS) Height (cm) Height (cm) Percent 6 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 KALxKAL K ALxPG PGxKA L PGxPG Figure 2: First- and second-year Female x heights Male Source for the seed orchard aftereffects plantation (WANSA) T R E E I M P R O V E M E N T P R O G R A M KALxKAL KALxPG PGxKAL PGxPG Figure 3: Percent seedling Female damage x Male at Source the WANSA plantation after the first winter by damage class and female x male parent source KALxKA L KALxPG PGxKAL PGxPG Female x Male Source 2000 2001 2000 2001 none 50% dead P R O J E C T R E P O R T 2 0 0 6 / 2 0 0 7 Conclus on While the progeny from Vernon suffered more damage the first year after planting, parent source had little effect six years later on height. Our objective for this project was to determine if parent source affected bud burst and/or height growth. Data collected in <strong>2006</strong> suggest that growth may be slightly different depending on parent source. While this may have biological significance, it does not have any operational significance. This data also suggest that orchard seed from the north Okanagan is as well adapted to Prince George planting sites as seed from Prince George. F gure 1. F rst- and second- year he ghts for the seed orchard aftereffects plantat on (PGTIS). F gure 2. F rst- and second- year he ghts for the seed orchard aftereffects plantat on (WANSA). F gure 3. Percent seedl ng damage at the WANSA plantat on after the first w nter by damage class and female x male parent source.
Percent Julian Date Julian Date Height (cm) Height (cm) 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 150 148 146 144 142 140 148 146 144 142 140 138 115 113 111 109 107 105 88 86 84 82 80 78 T R E E I M P R O V E M E N T P R O G R A M Figure 4: Percent seedling damage at the PGTIS plantation after the first winter by damage class and female x male parent source KALxKAL K ALxPG PGxKAL PGxPG none 50% dead Figure 5: Mean (±standard Female errors) x Male Julian Source date of bud burst for the WANSA plantation for each of the four female x male parent sources. KALxKA L KALxPG PGxKAL PGxPG Figure 6: Mean (±standard Female errors) Julian x Male date Source of bud burst for the PGTIS plantation for each of the four female x male parent sources. KALxKA L KALxPG P GxK AL P GxP G Female x Male Source Figure 7: Mean (±standard errors) height growth (cm) for the WANSA plantation for each of the four female x male parent sources. Mean Seven Year Heights (WANSA Plantation) KALxKA L KALxPG P GxK AL P GxP G Female x Male Source Figure 8: Mean (±standard errors) height growth (cm) for the PGTIS plantation for each of the four female x male parent sources. Mean Seven Year Heights (PGTIS Plantation) KALxKAL KALxPG PGxK AL PGxPG Female x Male Source P R O J E C T R E P O R T 2 0 0 6 / 2 0 0 7 F gure . Percent seedl ng damage at the PGTIS plantat on after the first w nter by damage class and female x male parent source. F gure . Mean (± standard errors) Jul an date of bud burst for the WANSA plantat on for each of the four female x male parent sources. F gure 6. Mean (± standard errors) Jul an date of bud burst for the PGTIS plantat on for each of the four female x male parent sources. F gure 7. Mean (± standard errors) he ght growth (cm) for the WANSA plantat on for each of the four female x male parent sources. F gure . Mean (± standard errors) he ght growth (cm) for the WANSA plantat on for each of the four female x male parent sources. 7
Page 1 and 2:
2006/2007 Forest Genetics Council o
Page 3 and 4:
T R E E I M P R O V E M E N T P R O
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Table of Contents T R E E I M P R O
Page 9 and 10:
L st of F gures T R E E I M P R O V
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
1.0 Expans on of Orchard Seed Suppl
Page 17 and 18:
2.0 GRIM Project Accompl shments n
Page 19 and 20: Cl mate Change ClimateBC: Our Clima
Page 21 and 22: T R E E I M P R O V E M E N T P R O
Page 23 and 24: Volume Growth at Sutton Creek (cm^3
Page 25 and 26: . True F r Forest Genet cs Charl e
Page 27 and 28: The provincial status report on int
Page 29 and 30: .10 Inter or Spruce Tree Breed ng P
Page 31 and 32: .12 Lodgepole, Wh te and Ponderosa
Page 33 and 34: .0 Operat onal Tree Improvement - t
Page 35 and 36: Low-elevat on Western Hemlock Crop
Page 37 and 38: .1.2 Sechelt Seed Orchard Patt Brow
Page 39 and 40: .1. Bowser Seed Orchard Dav d Re d
Page 41 and 42: .1.6 Vernon Seed Orchard Company (V
Page 43 and 44: .1.7 Grandv ew Seed Orchards (PRT A
Page 45 and 46: .1. Eagle Rock Seed Orchards (Tolko
Page 47 and 48: yielded a total of 69 litres of pol
Page 49 and 50: Pest management n h gh-elevat on we
Page 51 and 52: slide monitor 4. Figure 31 shows th
Page 53 and 54: T R E E I M P R O V E M E N T P R O
Page 55 and 56: Three major branches on each sample
Page 57 and 58: TSPC FSPC TSPC FSPC 40 30 20 10 0 3
Page 59 and 60: .2.7 Increas ng Qual ty, Genet c Ga
Page 61 and 62: .2.9 Crown Prun ng Techn que for No
Page 63 and 64: Filled Seed per Cone Filled Seed pe
Page 65 and 66: 2005 and 2006, the corresponding va
Page 67 and 68: esponse to NH 4 NO 3 acts through n
Page 69: to 2000. Crosses were completed at
Page 73 and 74: .2.1 Conduct ng a Ser es of So l Te
Page 75 and 76: Cone Number Filled Seed Number TSPC
Page 77 and 78: effect) compared to the north Okana
Page 79 and 80: Dehydration: Long-shoot bud samples
Page 81 and 82: pollen receptivity (Table 26). It w
Page 83 and 84: it must be noted that the genotypes
Page 85 and 86: .2.17 Development of Yellow-Cedar S
Page 87 and 88: ut there was a substantial decrease
Page 89 and 90: 7.0 Seed Orchard Pest Management Ro
Page 91 and 92: Append x 2 Tree Spec es T R E E I M
Page 93 and 94: Append x Author Contact L st T R E
Page 95 and 96: INSIDE COVER
show all

Tree Improvement Program Project Report 2006 / 2007

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

Delete template?

Save as template?