Tree Improvement Program Project Report 2006 / 2007

More documents

Recommendations

Info

66 T R E E I M P R O V E M E N T P R O G R A M Clone ID 5-Jul 18-Jul 1-Aug 15-Aug 31-Aug 15-Sep 3-Oct totals 1506 3 5 4 3 4 4 1 24 1524 2 3 5 5 4 4 1 24 1531 - 6 5 6 1 1 2 21 1539 2 3 3 5 5 4 3 25 1540 - 6 3 2 1 1 2 15 totals 7 23 20 21 15 14 9 109 Dates of Collection Clone ID 5-Jul 18-Jul 1-Aug 15-Aug 31-Aug 15-Sep 3-Oct Clone ID 1506 F F F 1524 ? F 1531 ? ? F 1539 ? F 1540 ? F F F F Pollen receptivity stage Number cones/tree 1506 late 226 1524 late 68 1531 mid 455 1539 early 25 1540 early 620 Dates of Collection Table 26. Pollen recept v ty and cone product on of the five clones selected at KRS. Clone ID 5-Jul 18-Jul 1-Aug 15-Aug 31-Aug 15-Sep 3-Oct 1506 LSB LSB 1524 LSB LSB 1531 ? ? LSB LSB 1539 LSB 1540 ? LSB Table 27. Table show ng the d str but on of lateral shoot buds found n the five clones collected at KRS. Quest on marks represent buds that were e ther develop ng lateral-shoot buds or female strob l . results would be similar, we can surmise that long-shoot bud length, in particular long long-shoot bud length early in the season, is characteristic of low cone producers (Figure 69). Although this relationship would appear to be significant, this is only really apparent towards the end of P R O J E C T R E P O R T 2 0 0 6 / 2 0 0 7 Table 2 . Number of samples sect oned of the five clones from each collect on date. Table 2 . Develop ng female strob l found n the five clones collected from the Kalamalka Research Stat on (KRS). Quest on marks represent buds that were e ther develop ng lateral-shoot buds or female strob l . the summer, far after such a trait would be operationally useful (Figure 70). Female development is earliest in 1506, 1531, and 1540 and latest in 1524 and 1539. This does not correlate with another historical measure of development in these clones,
pollen receptivity (Table 26). It would appear that the rate of female bud differentiation is not linked to female bud opening in the following year. In this case, the data were taken from a previous year’s study and may be of limited applicability. The study also provided other information supporting a general observation that all buds — male buds, lateralshoot buds, female buds, and short-shoot buds — showed earlier differentiation than previously reported. Male buds were easily identifiable from the proximal portions of the axis, both when hand cutting the longshoot buds (results not shown), as well as from histological sections (Figure 71). Male strobili were already clearly recognizable for all clones at the time of the earliest collection date (July 5, 2006). Differences in sizes and maturation of male strobili between different clones were observed. Even at the earliest date, some were already quite large, showing well-developed microsporophylls. In male strobili that were particularly large or at an advanced stage of development, developing microsporangia could be seen as circular areas of lightly staining cells with large diffused nuclei at the abaxial surface of the microsporophyll. They formed a slight protrusion from the lower portion of the microsporophyll. Male strobili were found along the axis of the long-shoot bud from the base to approximately twothirds to three-quarters up the length of the bud. Lateral-shoot buds (LSB) were initiated in the same region of the long-shoot bud as female strobili. At the early stages of development, lateral-shoot buds and female strobili were difficult to distinguish from one other. This is reflected in Table 25 and Table 27 by question marks. As development progressed, lateral-shoot buds appeared more conical than female strobili. LSBs also lacked bract primordia (Figure 72). Both bud types are initiated at the same time, as would appear to be the case if Table 25 and Table 27 are compared. The order of the earliest to latest clones is the same for both bud types, but this may be an artifact of both uniform initial stages and sampling error. An important observation is that lateral-shoot buds and female buds become obvious at about the same time, which we interpret to mean that initiation of the bud types is also likely to be synchronous. If the two tables were combined, it would further emphasize that initiation is earlier than previously thought. Short-shoot buds were initiated in the axils of cataphylls along the entirety of the long-shoot bud axis. These buds differentiated into needles. At advanced stages of differentiation, short-shoot buds showed primordia on either side (Figure 73). T R E E I M P R O V E M E N T P R O G R A M P R O J E C T R E P O R T 2 0 0 6 / 2 0 0 7 F gure 6 . Long tud nal sect on of female bud of lodgepole p ne from clone 1 2 , 3 October, 2006. F gure 69. Collect on date (2006) versus long-shoot bud length. F gure 70. Compar son of clones 1 31 and 1 39 on October 3, 2006. Bar=1 cm. 67
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:
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 and 70: to 2000. Crosses were completed at
Page 71 and 72: Percent Julian Date Julian Date Hei
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: Dehydration: Long-shoot bud samples
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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?