Performance of loblolly pine (Pinus taeda L.) seedlings and micropropagated plantlets on an east Texas site: I. Above- and belowground growth |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Department of Forest Science, Texas A&M University, TAMU 2135, College Station, TX 77843-2135, USA;2. Department of Biology, East Carolina State University, Greenville, NC 27858-4353, USA;1. Laboratory of Microbial Biotechnology, Faculty of Science and Technology, Sidi Mohamed Ben Abdellah University, BP 2202 Fez, Morocco;2. Regional University Center of Interface, Sidi Mohamed Ben Abdellah University, BP 2626, 30000 Fez, Morocco;3. Laboratory of Transmission and Processing of Information, High School of Technology, BP 2427 Fez, Morocco;1. Centro de Estudos Florestais, Instituto Superior de Agronomia, Universidade de Lisboa, Tapada da Ajuda, 1349-017 Lisboa, Portugal;2. INRA, UMR 1202 Biogeco, F-33610 Cestas, France;3. Univ. Bordeaux, BIOGECO, UMR 1202, F-33615 Pessac, France;4. Instituto Nacional de Investigação Agrária e Veterinária, I.P., Av. da República, Quinta do Marquês, 2780-159 Oeiras, Portugal;1. Ecological Chemistry Group, Department of Chemistry, Royal Institute of Technology (KTH), 100 44 Stockholm, Sweden;2. Department of Ecology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SLU), 750 07 Uppsala, Sweden;1. División Entomología, Facultad de Ciencias Naturales y Museo, Universidad Nacional de La Plata, Buenos Aires, Argentina;2. Comisión de Investigaciones Científicas de la Provincia de Buenos Aires (CIC), Buenos Aires, Argentina;3. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (CONICET), Buenos Aires, Argentina;4. Centro de Investigaciones de Fitopatología (CIDEFI), Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias y Forestales, Universidad Nacional de La Plata, Buenos Aires, Argentina;5. Instituto de Fisiología Vegetal (INFIVE), Universidad Nacional de La Plata, Buenos Aires, Argentina;6. Instituto de Botánica Carlos Spegazzini, Facultad de Ciencias Naturales y Museo, Universidad Nacional de La Plata, Buenos Aires, Argentina;7. Cátedra de Microbiología Agrícola, Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias y Forestales, Universidad Nacional de La Plata, Buenos Aires, Argentina;1. Department of Forest Genetics and Plant Physiology, Umeå Plant Science Centre (UPSC), Swedish University of Agricultural Science (SLU), Umeå, Sweden;2. G.W. Woodruff School of Mechanical Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, USA;3. Bioautomaton Systems Inc., Atlanta, GA, USA |
| |
| Abstract: | East Texas contains the western extent of the natural range of loblolly pine (Pinus taeda L.) and, therefore, many planted seedlings there experience water deficit sometimes leading to plantation failure. One solution may be to regenerate with clonally propagated drought-hardy planting stock. The objective of this research was to compare the field performance of loblolly pine seedlings and plantlets of diverse genetic origin, produced via micropropagation technology.Two adjacent sites were established (Site I in 1993 and Site II in 1994) with trees produced from four genetic families: Liberty (LIB) and Montgomery (MON) Counties from southeast Texas, and Fayette (FAY) and Bastrop (BAS) Counties from the “Lost Pines” in Central Texas. Height, groundline diameter (GLD), leaf area, survival, root/shoot ratio, and root system architecture were measured throughout the 1994 and 1995 growing seasons. In addition, height and diameter at breast height on Site II were measured at the end of 1999 and 2000 growing seasons.Height and GLD growth for seedlings was significantly greater than for plantlets on both sites. However, mean relative growth rates for height were greater for plantlets during the first growing season, but comparable thereafter. Survival for all treatments was >85% on Site I and >90% on Site II at the end of the 1995 growing season. Survival was significantly different, but by a negligible margin, between families and stock types on Site II at the end of the 1995 growing season, and by a margin of 7% (89% for seedlings vs. 82% for plantlets) at the end of the 2000 growing season. Seedlings had greater leaf area growth than plantlets after two growing seasons. Root/shoot ratio was significantly greater for plantlets after two growing seasons, whereas their specific root length was significantly smaller than that of seedlings. This was attributed to root system architecture. Whereas plantlets produced thicker roots with less length per unit dry weight, seedlings produced more branching with thinner roots for similar dry weights. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
