Advertisement

Trees

, Volume 28, Issue 2, pp 389–398 | Cite as

The use of digital morphometrics and spring phenology for clone recognition in trembling aspen (populus tremuloides michx.) and its comparison to microsatellite markers

  • Hana JelínkováEmail author
  • Francine Tremblay
  • Annie DesRochers
Original Paper

Abstract

Aspen clones were traditionally identified based on similarities in several phenotypic traits including leaf shape. This required several visits of the stands, laborious measurements and subjective visual assessments. In this study, we investigated a novel approach to clone identification using digital morphometrics of leaf shape complemented with bark characteristics and spring phenology. Aspen clones were delineated based on molecular (microsatellite loci), morphological (leaf shape, bark colour and type) and phenological (when first fully expanded leaves appeared) characteristics. Leaves were scanned and images were analyzed using normalized elliptic Fourier descriptors and principal component analysis. Using microsatellite loci, 18 clones were identified among 60 aspen trees in three sites investigated in this study. When employing digital morphometrics, foliar types in two out of the three sites matched the clones defined by microsatellite markers. Many ramets from the third site were clustered erroneously into incorrect clones. The reclassification test indicated that leaf shape contains features according to which very similar clones can be differentiated with low error rates. However, because it was not possible to set a threshold for maximum distances within clones, application of digital morphometrics of complex leaf shape for clone identification in natural aspen stands with a high number of multi-ramet clones and many singletons is unfeasible. We judged spring phenology as the least reliable trait for clone recognition and suggested possible causes of heterogeneous leaf flushing among ramets of the same genotype.

Keywords

Populus tremuloides Clone identification Leaf flush Environmental effect Morphometrics Ramet Foliar diversity Spring phenology Microsatellite markers Clonal integration 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank to everybody who has participated in this project namely M. Baret, E. Whitfield, and C. Pack. This work was supported by the Centre for Forest Research, National Science and Engineering Research Council, Industrial Chair NSERC-UQAT-UQAM in Sustainable Forest Management, Fonds de recherche sur la nature et les technologies, and the government of Quebec.

References

  1. Baret M, DesRochers A (2011) Root connections can trigger physiological responses to defoliation in nondefoliated aspen suckers. Botany 89:753–761CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barnes BV (1966) The clonal growth habit of American aspens. Ecology 47:439–447CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barnes BV (1969) Natural variation and delineation of clonesof Populus tremuloides and P. grandidentata in northern lower Michigan. Silvae Genetica 18:130–142Google Scholar
  4. Barnes BV, Han FQ (1993) Phenotypic variation of chinese aspens and their relationships to similar taxa in Europe and North-America. Can J Bot 71:799–815CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bylesjo M, Segura V, Soolanayakanahally RY, Rae AM, Trygg J, Gustafsson P, Jansson S, Street NR (2008) LAMINA: a tool for rapid quantification of leaf size and shape parameters. BMC Plant Biol 8:82–91PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cannon CH, Manos PS (2001) Combining and comparing morphometric shape descriptors with a molecular phylogeny: the case of fruit type evolution in Bornean Lithocarpus (Fagaceae). Syst Biol 50:860–880PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cope JS, Corney D, Clark JY, Remagnino P, Wilkin P (2012) Plant species identification using digital morphometrics: a review. Expert Syst Appl 39:7562–7573CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dayanandan S, Rajora OP, Bawa KS (1998) Isolation and characterization of microsatellites in trembling aspen (Populus tremuloides). Theor Appl Genet 96:950–956CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. De Woody J, Rickman TH, Jones BE, Hipkins VD (2009) Allozyme and microsatellite data reveal small clone size and high genetic diversity in aspen in the southern Cascade Mountains. For Ecol Manage 258:687–696CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. DeWoody J, Rowe CA, Hipkins VD, Mock DE (2008) “Pando” lives: molecular genetic evidence of a giant aspen clone in central Utah. North Am Nat 68:493–497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. DesRochers A, Lieffers VJ (2001) The coarse-root system of mature Populus tremuloides in declining stands in Alberta, Canada. J Veg Sci 12:355–360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Furuta N, Ninomiya S, Takahashi N, Ohmori H, Ukai Y (1995) Quantitative-evaluation of soybean (Glycine-max L MERR) leaflet shape by principal component scores based on elliptic Fourier descriptor. Breed Sci 45:315–320Google Scholar
  13. Gom LA, Rood SB (1999) The discrimination of cottonwood clones in a mature grove along the Oldman River in southern Alberta. Can J Bot 77:1084–1094Google Scholar
  14. Iwata H, Ukai Y (2002) SHAPE: a computer program package for quantitative evaluation of biological shapes based on elliptic Fourier descriptors. J Hered 93:384–385PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Iwata H, Nesumi H, Ninomiya S, Takano Y, Ukai Y (2002a) Diallel analysis of leaf shape variations of citrus varieties based on elliptic Fourier descriptors. Breed Sci 52:89–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Iwata H, Nesumi H, Ninomiya S, Takano Y, Ukai Y (2002b) The evaluation of genotype x environment interactions of citrus leaf morphology using image analysis and elliptic Fourier descriptors. Breed Sci 52:243–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Jelínková H, Tremblay F, DesRochers A (2009) Molecular and dendrochronological analysis of natural root grafting in Populus tremuloides (Salicaceae). Am J Bot 96:1500–1505PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Jensen RJ, Ciofani KM, Miramontes LC (2002a) Lines, outlines, and landmarks: morphometric analyses of leaves of Acer rubrum, Acer saccharinum (Aceraceae) and their hybrid. Taxon 51:475–492CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Jensen RJ, Schwoyer M, Crawford DJ, Stuessy TF, Anderson GJ, Baeza CM, Ruiz O, Ruiz E (2002b) Patterns of morphological and genetic variation among populations of Myrceugenia fernandeziana (Myrtaceae) on Masatierra island: implications for conservation. Syst Bot 27:534–547Google Scholar
  20. Kemperman J, Barnes B. (1976) Clone size in American aspens. Can J Bot. 2603–2607Google Scholar
  21. Kuhl FP, Giardina CR (1982) Elliptic Fourier features of a closed contour. Comput Graphics Image Process 18:236–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lexer C, Joseph J, van Loo M, Prenner G, Heinze B, Chase W, Kirkup D (2009) The use of digital image-based morphometrics to study the phenotypic mosaic in taxa with porous genomes. Taxon 58:349–364Google Scholar
  23. Liesebach H, Schneck V, Ewald E (2010) Clonal fingerprinting in the genus Populus L. by nuclear microsatellite loci regarding differences between sections, species and hybrids. Tree Genet Genomes 6:259–269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lopez-de-Heredia U, Sierra-de-Grado R, Cristobal MD, Martinez-Zurimendi P, Pando V, Martin MT (2004) A comparison of isozyme and morphological markers to assess the within population variation in small populations of European aspen (Populus tremula L.) in Spain. Silvae Genetica 53:227–233Google Scholar
  25. Mancuso S (1999) Elliptic Fourier Analysis (EFA) and Artificial Neural Networks (ANNs) for the identification of grapevine (Vitis vinifera L.) genotypes. Vitis 38:73–77Google Scholar
  26. McLellan T, Endler JA (1998) The relative success of some methods for measuring and describing the shape of complex objects. Syst Biol 47:264–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Menesatti P, Costa C, Paglia G, Pallottino F, D’Andrea S, Rimatori V, Aguzzi J (2008) Shape-based methodology for multivariate discrimination among Italian hazelnut cultivars. Biosyst Eng 101:417–424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Mock KE, Rowe CA, Hooten MB, Dewoody J, Hipkins VD (2008) Clonal dynamics in western North American aspen (Populus tremuloides). Mol Ecol 17:4827–4844PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Namroud MC, Park A, Tremblay F, Bergeron Y (2005) Clonal and spatial genetic structures of aspen (Populus tremuloides Michx.). Mol Ecol 14:2969–2980PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Neto JC, Meyer GE, Jones DD, Samal AK (2006) Plant species identification using Elliptic Fourier leaf shape analysis. Comput Electron Agric 50:121–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Penaloza-Ramirez JM, Gonzalez-Rodriguez A, Mendoza-Cuenca L, Caron H, Kremer A, Oyama K (2010) Interspecific gene flow in a multispecies oak hybrid zone in the Sierra Tarahumara of Mexico. Ann Bot 105:389–399PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Persson HA, Gustavsson BA (2001) The extent of clonality and genetic diversity in lingonberry (Vaccinium vitis-idaea L.) revealed by RAPDs and leaf-shape analysis. Mol Ecol 10:1385–1397PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Rahman MH, Dayanandan S, Rajora OP (2000) Microsatellite DNA markers in Populus tremuloides. Genome 43:293–297PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Rajora OP, Rahman MH, MullerStarck G, Schubert R (2001) Microsatellite DNA markers and their usefulness in poplars, and conservation of microsatellite DNA loci in Salicaceae. Genet Response For Systems Chang Environ Cond 70:105–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Rumpunen K, Bartish IV (2002) Comparison of differentiation estimates based on morphometric and molecular data, exemplified by various leaf shape descriptors and RAPDs in the genus Chaenomeles (Rosaceae). Taxon 51:69–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Suvanto LI, Latva-Karjanmaa TB (2005) Clone identification and clonal structure of the European aspen (Populus tremula). Mol Ecol 14:2851–2860PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Torres MAJ, Demayo CG, Siar SV (2008) Elliptic Fourier analysis of leaf outline differences between and among sixteen species of Hoya. Philipp Agric Sci 91:18–28Google Scholar
  38. Viscosi V, Fortini P (2011) Leaf shape variation and differentiation in three sympatric white oak species revealed by elliptic Fourier analysis. Nord J Bot 29:632–640CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Wu RL (2000) Quantitative genetic variation of leaf size and shape in a mixed diploid and triploid population of Populus. Genet Res 75:215–222PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Wu RL, Bradshaw HD, Stettler RF (1997) Molecular genetics of growth and development in Populus (Salicaceae).5. Mapping quantitative trait loci affecting leaf variation. Am J Bot 84:143–153PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Wyman J, Bruneau A, Tremblay MF (2003) Microsatellite analysis of genetic diversity in four populations of Populus tremuloides in Quebec. Can J Bot 81:360–367CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Yoshioka Y, Iwata H, Ohsawa R, Ninomiya S (2004) Analysis of petal shape variation of Primula sieboldii by elliptic Fourier descriptors and principal component analysis. Ann Bot 94:657–664PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hana Jelínková
    • 1
    Email author
  • Francine Tremblay
    • 1
  • Annie DesRochers
    • 2
  1. 1.University of Quebec in Abitibi-TémiscamingueRouyn-NorandaCanada
  2. 2.University of Quebec in Abitibi-TémiscamingueAmosCanada

Personalised recommendations