, Volume 27, Issue 5, pp 1443–1453 | Cite as

Tree rings reveal extent of exposure to ionizing radiation in Scots pine Pinus sylvestris

  • Timothy A. Mousseau
  • Shane M. Welch
  • Igor Chizhevsky
  • Oleg Bondarenko
  • Gennadi Milinevsky
  • David J. Tedeschi
  • Andrea Bonisoli-Alquati
  • Anders Pape MøllerEmail author
Original Paper


Tree growth has been hypothesized to provide a reliable indicator of the state of the external environment. Elevated levels of background ionizing radiation may impair growth trajectories of trees by reducing the annual growth. Such effects of radiation may depend on the individual phenotype and interact with other environmental factors such as temperature and drought. We used standardized growth rates of 105 Scots pine Pinus sylvestris located near Chernobyl, Ukraine, varying in the level of background radiation by almost a factor 700. Mean growth rate was severely depressed and more variable in 1987–1989 and several other subsequent years, following the nuclear accident in April 1986 compared to the situation before 1986. The higher frequency of years with poor growth after 1986 was not caused by elevated temperature, drought or their interactions with background radiation. Elevated temperatures suppressed individual growth rates in particular years. Finally, the negative effects of radioactive contaminants were particularly pronounced in smaller trees. These findings suggest that radiation has suppressed growth rates of pines in Chernobyl, and that radiation interacts with other environmental factors and phenotypic traits of plants to influence their growth trajectories in complex ways.


Chernobyl Growth Interaction between stressors Ionizing radiation Tree height Tree rings 



We are grateful for logistic help during our visits to Ukraine and Belarus from M. Bondarkov and A. Litvinchuk. We also thank L. Dobbs for assistance with radio-dosimetry at USC. We received funding from the University of South Carolina School of the Environment, Bill Murray and the Samuel Freeman Charitable Trust, the National Science Foundation, NATO, the Fulbright Program, CRDF and the National Geographic Society to conduct our research. We acknowledge the E-OBS dataset from the EU-FP6 project ENSEMBLES ( and the data providers in the ECA&D project (


  1. Arkhipov NP, Kuchma ND, Askbrant S, Pasternak PS, Musica VV (1994) Acute and long-term effects of irradiation on pine (Pinus sylvestris) stands post-Chernobyl. Sci Total Environ 157:383–386PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Carrer M, Urbinati C (2004) Age-dependent tree-ring growth responses to climate in Larix decidua and Pinus cembra. Ecology 85:730–740CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ceulemans R, Mousseau M (1994) Effects of elevated atmospheric CO2 on woody plants. New Phytol 127:425–446CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cherubini P, Gartner BL, Tognetti R et al (2003) Identification, measurement and interpretation of tree rings in woody species from Mediterranean climates. Biol Rev 78:119–148PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cohen J (1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Erlbaum, HillsdaleGoogle Scholar
  6. Cook ER, Kairiukstis LA (eds) (1990) Methods of dendrochronology: applications in the environmental sciences. Kluwer Academic, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  7. Dighton J, Tugay T, Zhdanova N (2008) Fungi and ionizing radiation from radionuclides. FEMS Microbiol Lett 281:109–120PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fritts HC (1976) Tree rings and climate. Academic Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  9. Haylock MR, Hofstra N, Klein Tank AMG, Klok EJ, Jones PD, New M (2008) A European daily high-resolution gridded dataset of surface temperature and precipitation. J Geophys Res (Atmospheres) 113:D20119. doi: 10.1029/2008JD10201 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kagawa A, Aoki T, Okada N, Katayama Y (2002) Tree-ring strontium-90 and cesium-137 as potential indicators of radioactive pollution. J Environ Qual 31:2001–2007PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kal’chenko VA, Fedotov IS (2001) Genetic effects of acute and chronic ionizing irradiation on Pinus sylvestris L. inhabiting the Chernobyl meltdown area. Russ J Genet 37:341–350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kal’chenko VA, Arkhipov NP, Fedotov IS (1993a) Mutations of enzyme loci, induced in megaspores of Pinus sylvestris L. by ionizing radiation after the accident at the Chernobyl Atomic Power Plant. Genetika 29:266–273PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Kal’chenko VA, Rubanovich AV, Fedotov IS, Arkhipov NP (1993b) Genetic effects of the Chernobyl meltdown on the germline cells of common pine Pinus sylvestris L. Genetika 29:1205–1212Google Scholar
  14. Kashparov VA, Lundina SM, Kadygriba AM, Protsaka VP, Levtchuka SE, Yoschenkoa VI, Kashpurb VA, Talerko NM (2000) Forest fires in the territory contaminated as a result of the Chernobyl accident: radioactive aerosol resuspension and exposure of fire-fighters. J Environ Radioact 51:281–298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Koch GW, Sillett SC, Jennings GM, Davis SD (2004) The limits to tree height. Nature 428:851–854PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kovalchuk O, Dubrova YE, Arkhipov A, Hohn B, Kovalchuk I (2000) Wheat mutation rate after Chernobyl. Nature 407:583–584PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kovalchuk O, Burke P, Arkhipov A, Kuchma N, James SJ, Kovalchuk I, Pogribny I (2003) Genome hypermethylation in Pinus sylvestris of Chernobyl—a mechanism for radiation adaptation? Mutat Res 529:13–20PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Larsson L (2008a) CooRecorder Program of the CDendro Package Version 7.1.
  19. Larsson L (2008b) CDendro Program of the CDendro Package Version 7.1.
  20. Møller AP, Jennions MD (2002) How much variance can be explained by ecologists and evolutionary biologists? Oecologia 132:492–500CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Møller AP, Mousseau TA (2006) Biological consequences of Chernobyl: 20 years after the disaster. Trends Ecol Evol 21:200–207PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Møller AP, Mousseau TA (2007a) Determinants of interspecific variation in population declines of birds from exposure to radiation at Chernobyl. J Appl Ecol 44:909–919CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Møller AP, Mousseau TA (2007b) Species richness and abundance of birds in relation to radiation at Chernobyl. Biol Lett 3:483–486PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Møller AP, Mousseau TA (2008) Reduced abundance of raptors in radioactively contaminated areas near Chernobyl. J Orn 150:239–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Møller AP, Mousseau TA (2009) Reduced abundance of insects and spiders linked to radiation at Chernobyl 20 years after the accident. Biol Lett 5:356–359PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Rubanovich AV, Kal’chenko VA (1994) Altered segregation in Pinus sylvestris L. populations exposed to chronic irradiation in the region of the Chernobyl meltdown. Genetika 30:126–128PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. SAS Institute Inc (2012) JMP version 10.0. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NCGoogle Scholar
  28. Schmitt U, Grünwald C, Eckstein D (2000) Xylem structure in pine trees grown near the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant/Ukraine. IAWA J 21:379–387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Shestopalov VM (1996) Atlas of Chernobyl exclusion zone. Ukrainian Academy of Science, KievGoogle Scholar
  30. Shevchenko VA, Abramov VI, Kal’chenko VA et al (1996) Genetic consequences induced in plant populations as a result of radioactive environmental pollution after the Chernobyl meltdown. Radiat Biol Radioekol 36:531–545Google Scholar
  31. Ufar K (2007) Dendrochronology and past human activity: a review of advances since 2000. Tree Ring Res 63:47–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Woodwell GM, Miller LN (1963) Chronic gamma radiation affects the distribution of radial increments in Pinus rigida stems. Science 139:222–223PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Yablokov AV, Nesterenko VB, Nesterenko AV (2009) Chernobyl: consequences of the catastrophe for people and nature. New York Academy of Sciences, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  34. Yoschenko VI, Kashparov VA, Levchuk SE, Glukhovskiy AS, Khomutinin YV, Protsak VP, Lundin SH, Tschiersch J (2006a) Resuspension and redistribution of radionuclides during grassland and forest fires in the Chernobyl exclusion zone: part II. Modeling the transport process. J Environ Radioact 87:260–278PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Yoschenko VI, Kashparov VA, Protsak VP, Lundin SM, Levchuk SE, Kadygib AM, Zvarich SI, Khomutinin YV, Maloshtan IM, Lanshin VP, Kovtun MV, Tschiersch J (2006b) Resuspension and redistribution of radionuclides during grassland and forest fires in the Chernobyl exclusion zone: part I. Fire experiments. J Environ Radioact 86:143–163PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Zakharov VM, Krysanov EY (eds) (1996) Consequences of the Chernobyl catastrophe: environmental health. Center for Russian Environmental Policy, MoscowGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Timothy A. Mousseau
    • 1
  • Shane M. Welch
    • 1
  • Igor Chizhevsky
    • 2
  • Oleg Bondarenko
    • 2
  • Gennadi Milinevsky
    • 3
  • David J. Tedeschi
    • 4
  • Andrea Bonisoli-Alquati
    • 1
  • Anders Pape Møller
    • 5
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Biological SciencesUniversity of South CarolinaColumbiaUSA
  2. 2.Chornobyl Radioecological CentreChernobylUkraine
  3. 3.Space Physics LaboratoryTaras Shevchenko National University of KyivKyivUkraine
  4. 4.Department of Physics and AstronomyUniversity of South CarolinaColumbiaUSA
  5. 5.Laboratoire d’Ecologie, Systématique et Evolution, CNRS UMR 8079Université Paris-SudOrsay CedexFrance

Personalised recommendations