Trees

, Volume 21, Issue 2, pp 191–199 | Cite as

Secondary buds in Scots pine trees infested with Gremmeniella abietina

  • Gunnhild Søgaard
  • Halvor Solheim
  • Øystein Johnsen
Original Article
First Online:
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:

Abstract

In winter 2000–2001, there was a serious outbreak of Gremmeniella abietina Morelet in southeastern Norway. During the outbreak, we noted that injured Scots pine trees (Pinus sylvestris L.) developed secondary buds in response to the fungus attack, and we decided to study the relationship between injury, appearance of secondary buds and recovery of the trees thereafter. For this purpose, 143 trees from 10 to 50 years of age were chosen and grouped into crown density classes. Injury was assessed in detail, and buds were counted before bud burst in the spring of 2002. In addition, a subset of 15 trees was followed through the summer of 2002 to assess recovery. All injured trees developed secondary buds, with a clear overweight of dormant winter buds in proportion to interfoliar buds. Healthy control trees did not develop secondary buds at all. The secondary buds appeared predominantly on the injured parts of the tree; interfoliar buds in particular developed just beneath the damaged tissue. Most of the secondary buds died during the winter of 2001–2002, mainly because the fungus continued to spread after the first outbreak. Many of the remaining buds developed shoots with abnormal growth during the summer. Secondary buds may help trees to recover from Gremmeniella attacks, but this strategy may fail when the fungus continues to grow and injure the newly formed buds and shoots.

Keywords

Pinus sylvestris Brunchorstia dieback Dormant winter bud Interfoliar bud Crown density 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgements

This study was the M.Sc. thesis of G.S. at the Norwegian University of Life Sciences and was part of the project “Brown Scots Pine—Causes and Measures” financed by the Research Council of Norway, the Norwegian Forest Research Institute, NORSKOG, Skogbrand, and Skogtiltaksfondet. The County Governor of Hedmark county financed travel costs for G.S. Nicholas Clarke did linguistic improvements. The study was undertaken in forests owned by Jørgen J. Mathiesen, Torbjørn Gjølstad Jr., and Kjetil Aandstad. We thank the above-mentioned persons and institutions.

References

  1. Aalto-Kallonen T, Kurkela T (1985) Gremmeniella disease and site factors affecting the condition and growth of Scots pine. Commun Inst For Fenn 126:1–28Google Scholar
  2. Barklund P (1990) Gremmeniella abietina in Sweden: historical background and symptomatology of the disease. In: Kurkela A, Siwecki R (eds) Scots pine diseases, vol 360. Finnish Forest Research Institute, pp 55–58Google Scholar
  3. Belyea HC, MacAloney HJ (1926) Weather injury to terminal buds of Scotch pine and other conifers. J For 24:685–690Google Scholar
  4. Bjaanes H (2003) Furuas knopp-og greintørkesopp (Gremmeniella abietina). Skader og mottiltak i Hedmark 2001–2003. Rapport nr 09/03, Fylkesmannen i Hedmark, Landbruksavdelingen, Hamar, 16 pp + appendix (In Norwegian)Google Scholar
  5. Borthwick AW (1899) On interfoliar buds in pines. Trans Proc Bot Soc Edinburgh 21:154–158Google Scholar
  6. Braastad H (1980) Growth model computer program for Pinus sylvestris. Meddr Nor Inst Skogforsk 35:265–359 (In Norwegian with English summary)Google Scholar
  7. Büsgen M, Münch E (1929) The structure and life of forest trees. Chapman and Hall, LondonGoogle Scholar
  8. Butin H (1995) Tree diseases and disorders. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  9. Cooperrider CK (1938) Recovery processes of Ponderosa pine reproduction following injury to young annual growth. Plant Physiol 13:5–27PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Dickmann DI, Kozlowski TT (1968) Mobilization by Pinus resinosa cones and shoots of C14-photosynthate from needles of different ages. Am J Bot 55:900–906CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ericsson T (1991) Condition of Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris) and lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta) in Swedish Lapland, attacked by Gremmeniella fungus, three years after culmination of damage. Report no. 24, The Institute for Forest Improvement, Uppsala (In Swedish with English summary)Google Scholar
  12. Graham SA, Baumhoffer LG (1930) Susceptibility of young pines to tip-moth injury. J For 28:54–65Google Scholar
  13. Gremmen J (1972) Scleroderris lagerbergii Gr.: the pathogen and disease symptoms. Eur J For Path 2:1–5Google Scholar
  14. Hellgren M (1995) Gremmeniella abietina: disease biology and genetic variation within Fennoscandia. Doctoral thesis, Department of Forest Mycology and Pathology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, UppsalaGoogle Scholar
  15. Junttila O, Heide OM (1981) Shoot and needle growth in Pinus sylvestris as related to temperature in Northern Fennoscandia. For Sci 27:423–430Google Scholar
  16. Kienholz R (1933) Frost damage to Red pine. J For 31:392–399Google Scholar
  17. Kozlowski TT (1971) Growth and development of trees. Seed germination, ontogeny, and shoot growth, vol 1. Academic, New York and LondonGoogle Scholar
  18. Kozlowski TT, Keller T (1966) Food relations of woody plants. Bot Rev 32:293–382Google Scholar
  19. Kozlowski TT, Winget CH (1964) The role of reserves in leaves, branches, stems, and roots on shoot growth of Red pine. Am J Bot 51:522–529CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kulman HM (1965) Effects of artificial defoliation of pine on subsequent shoot and needle growth. For Sci 11:90–98Google Scholar
  21. Little CHA (1970) Apical dominance in long shoots of White pine (Pinus strobus). Can J Bot 48:239–253Google Scholar
  22. Little S, Somes HA (1956) Buds enable pitch and shortleaf pines to recover from injury. Station paper no. 81, Northeast For Exp Stat, Upper Darby, PennsylvaniaGoogle Scholar
  23. McIntyre GI (1964) Mechanism of apical dominance in plants. Nature 203:1190–1191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. McIntyre GI (1968) Nutritional control of the correlative inhibition between lateral shoots in the flax seedling (Linum usitatissimum). Can J Bot 46:147–155Google Scholar
  25. Mirov NT (1967) The genus Pinus. The Ronald Press Company, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  26. Montgomery DC (1984) Design and analysis of experiments, 2nd edn. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  27. Nakamura E (1964) Effect of decapitation and indole-3-acetic acid on the distribution of radioactive phosphorus in the stem of Pisum sativum. Plant Cell Physiol 5:521–524Google Scholar
  28. Patton RF, Spear RN, Blenis PV (1984) The mode of infection and early stages of colonization of pines by Gremmeniella abietina. Eur J For Path 14:193–202Google Scholar
  29. Read DJ (1968) Dieback disease of pines with special reference to Corsican pine (Pinus nigra) var. Calabrica Schn. III. Mycological factors. Forestry 41:72–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Riihinen A, Uotila A (1992) Effect of Scleroderris canker on the growth of middle-aged Scots pine stands. Folia For 783:1–10 (In Finnish with English summary)Google Scholar
  31. Roll-Hansen F, Roll-Hansen H, Skrøppa T (1992) Gremmeniella abietina, Phacidium infestans, and other causes of damage in alpine, young pine plantations in Norway. Eur J For Path 22:77–94Google Scholar
  32. Siepmann R (1976) Ein Beitrag zur Infektionsbiologie des durch Scleroderris lagerbergii verursachten Schwarzkieferntriebsterbens. Eur J For Path 6:103–109Google Scholar
  33. Sikström U, Jansson G, Weslien J (2005) Predicting the mortality of Pinus sylvestris attacked by Gremmeniella abietina and occurrence of Tomicus piniperda colonization. Can J For Res 35:860–867CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Snedecor GW, Cochran WG (1967) Statistical methods. The Iowa State University Press, Ames, Iowa, USAGoogle Scholar
  35. Stone Jr EL, Stone MH (1943) Dormant buds in certain species of Pinus. Am J Bot 30:346–351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. UNECE/EC (United Nations Economic Commission for Europe-European Commission) 1998 Manual on methods and criteria for harmonized sampling, assessment, monitoring and analysis of the effects of air pollution on forests. Part II: Visual assessment of crown condition, 4th edn. Updated 2004, 15 pp + annexesGoogle Scholar
  37. Uotila A (1983) Physiological and morphological variation among Finnish Gremmeniella abietina isolates. Commun Inst For Fenn 119:1–12Google Scholar
  38. Ursino DJ, Nelson CD, Krotkov G (1968) Seasonal changes in the distribution of photo-assimilated14C in young pine plants. Plant Physiol 43:845–852PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Wakeley PC (1928) Preliminary observations on the Pine tip moth (Rhyacionia frustrana Comst.) on southern pines. In: Transactions of the 4th International Congress on Entomology, Ithaca, vol 2, pp 865–868Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gunnhild Søgaard
    • 1
  • Halvor Solheim
    • 1
    • 2
  • Øystein Johnsen
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Ecology and Natural Resource ManagementNorwegian University of Life SciencesÅsNorway
  2. 2.Norwegian Forest and Landscape InstituteÅsNorway

Personalised recommendations