Advertisement

Tree Genetics & Genomes

, Volume 10, Issue 2, pp 287–296 | Cite as

Effects of silvicultural practices on genetic diversity and population structure of white spruce in Saskatchewan

  • Manphool S. Fageria
  • Om P. RajoraEmail author
Original Paper

Abstract

Forest harvesting and renewal practices using clearcut harvesting followed by artificial and natural regeneration (NR) may impact genetic diversity in subsequent forest tree populations. Plantations (PL) and phenotypic selections may exhibit lower genetic diversity than natural old growth (OG) and naturally-regenerated young populations because they may have a narrow genetic base. We used ten (six EST and four genomic) microsatellite loci, to reassess genetic impacts of silvicultural practices in white spruce (Picea glauca), previously assessed by using 51 RAPD markers by Rajora (1999). Allelic diversity at the genomic microsatellite loci was about three times higher than at the EST-derived microsatellite loci. Although the trends for microsatellite genetic diversity among different stands types were similar to that observed for RAPD markers, with natural OG stands showing the highest and tree improvement selections the lowest allelic and genotypic genetic diversity, no significant differences were observed for microsatellite genetic diversity among OG, young NR, PL and open-pollinated progeny of first-generation phenotypic selections (SEL). The inbreeding levels and genetic differentiation among populations within OG, NR and PL were also similar. However, phenotypic selections had somewhat different genetic constitution as they showed the highest genetic distances with OG, NR and SEL. On the other hand, the lowest genetic distances were observed between the OG and NR stands, which also had similar levels of genetic diversity. Our study suggests no significant negative impacts of harvesting and alternative reforestation practices on microsatellite genetic diversity in white spruce and calls for using more than one marker type in assessing the genetic impacts of silvicultural practices in forest trees.

Keywords

Picea glauca Genetic diversity Microsatellite markers Silvicultural regeneration practices Natural old growth Plantations Young natural regeneration Tree improvement selections 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The research was funded by the Canada Research Chair Program (CRC950- 201869) funds, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) Discovery Grant RGPIN 170651 and New Brunswick Innovation Foundation (NBIF) Research Assistant Initiative (RAI) grants to O.P. Rajora. Manphool Fageria was financially supported by the NSERC Discovery and NBIF RAI grants to O.P. Rajora, School of Graduate Studies, University of New Brunswick and a Canadian Forest Service graduate student's supplemental stipend. We thank Andrew Baird, Daniel Frank and Nancy Kang for assistance with microsatellite genotyping and data scoring, and Jean Beaulieu, Zeki Kaya and two anonymous reviewers for their useful comments on the previous version of this manuscript. The research results reported here are a part of the PhD thesis work conducted by M.S. Fageria under the supervision of the project principal investigator O.P. Rajora.

Authors' contributions

MSF: partial microsatellite genotyping, data analysis under the directions of OPR, initial manuscript draft preparation and revision. OPR: study conception, experimental design, field sampling, DNA preparation, overall study direction and supervision, data interpretation, manuscript writing and revision.

Data archiving

The microsatellite genotype data will be deposited to Dryad data repository.

References

  1. Adams WT, Zuo J, Shimizu JY, Tappeiner JC (1998) Impact of alternative regeneration methods on genetic diversity in coastal Douglas-fir. For Sci 44:390–396Google Scholar
  2. Alberta Sustainable Resource Development (2009) Alberta forest genetic resource management and conservation standards. Publication T/213. Alberta Sustainable Resource Development, Forestry Division. http://srd.alberta.ca/forests/managing/manuals.aspx
  3. Alden J, Loopstra C (1987) Genetic diversity and population structure of Picea glauca on an altitudinal gradient in interior Alaska. Can J For Res 17:1519–1526CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bergmann F, Gregorius HR, Larsen JB (1990) Levels of genetic variation in European silver fir (Abies alba). Genetica 82:1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Buchert GP, Rajora OP, Hood JV, Dancik BP (1997) Effects of harvesting on genetic diversity in old-growth eastern white pine in Ontario, Canada. Conserv Biol 11:747–758CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cheliak WM, Murray G, Pitel JA (1988) Genetic effects of phenotypic selection in white spruce. For Ecol Manage 24:139–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Desponts M, Plourde A, Beaulieu J, Daoust G (1993) Impact de la selection sur la variabilite genetique de l'epinette blanche au Quebec. Can J For Res 23:1196–1202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. El-Kassaby YA, Dunsworth BG, Krakowski J (2003) Genetic evaluation of alternative silvicultural systems in coastal montane forests: western hemlock and amabilis fir. Theor Appl Genet 107:598–610PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fageria MS, Rajora OP (2013) Effects of harvesting of increasing intensities on genetic diversity and population structure of white spruce. Evol Appl 6:778–794. doi: 10.1111/eva.12064 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Felsenstein J (2004) Inferring phylogenies. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, MAGoogle Scholar
  11. Finkeldey R, Ziehe M (2004) Genetic implications of silvicultural regimes. For Ecol Manage 197:231–244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Godt MJW, Hamrick JL, Edwards-bruke MA, Williams JH (2001) Comparisons of genetic diversity in white spruce (Picea glauca) and jack pine (Pinus banksiana) seed orchards with natural populations. Can J For Res 31:943–949CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Goudet J (1995) FSTAT (version 1.2): a computer program to calculate F-statistics. J Hered 86:485–486Google Scholar
  14. Hawley GJ, Schaberg PG, DeHayes DH, Brissette JC (2005) Silviculture alters the genetic structure of an eastern hemlock forest in Maine, USA. Can J For Res 35:143–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hodgetts RB, Aleksiuk MA, Brown A, Clark C, Macdonald E, Nadeem S, Khasa D (2001) Development of microsatellite markers for white spruce (Picea glauca) and related species. Theor Appl Genet 102:1252–1258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hosie RC (1979) Native trees of Canada. Fitzhenry and Whiteside, Don Mills, Ontario, CanadaGoogle Scholar
  17. Krakowski J, El-Kassaby YA (2004) Impacts of alternative silviculture systems on mating system and genetic diversity of forest tree species. In: Beaulieu J (ed), Silviculture and the conservation of genetic resources for sustainable forest management. Proc. Symp. North American Forest Commission, Forest Genetic Resources and Silviculture Working Groups and International Union of Forest Research Organizations, Sep 21, 2003, Quebec, Canada. Natural Resources Canada. pp 75–87Google Scholar
  18. Ledig TF, Guries RP, Bonefeld BA (1983) The relation of growth to heterozygosity in pitch pine. Evolution 37:1227–1238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lougheed SC, Gibbs HL, Prior KA, Weatherhead PJ (2000) A comparison of RAPD versus microsatellite DNA markers in population studies of the Massasauga rattlesnake. J Hered 91:458–463PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Macdonald SE, Thomas BR, Cherniawsky DM, Purdy BG (2001) Managing genetic resources of lodgepole pine in west-central Alberta: patterns of isozyme variation in natural populations and effects of forest management. For Ecol Manage 152:45–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Marshall DR, Brown ADH (1975) Optimum sampling strategies for gene conservation. In: Frankel OH, Hawkes JG (eds) Crop genetic resources for today and tomorrow. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 53–80Google Scholar
  22. Namroud M-C, Bousquet J, Doerksen T, Beaulieu J (2012) Scanning SNPs from a large set of expressed genes to assess the impact of artificial selection on the undomesticated genetic diversity of white spruce. Evol Appl 5:641–656PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Neale DB (1985) Genetic implications of shelter wood regeneration of Douglas-fir in Southwest Oregon. For Sci 31:995–1005Google Scholar
  24. Neale DB, Adams WT (1985) The mating system in natural and shelterwood stands of Douglas-fir. Theor Appl Genet 71:201–207PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Nei M (1978) Estimation of average heterozygosity and genetic distance from a small number of individuals. Genetics 89:583–590PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Nybom H (2004) Comparison of different nuclear DNA markers for estimating intraspecific genetic diversity in plants. Mol Ecol 13(5):1143–1155PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. O'Connell LM, Mosseler A, Rajora OP (2006) Impacts of forest fragmentation on the mating system and genetic diversity of white spruce (Picea glauca) at the landscape level. Heredity 97:418–426PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. O'Connell LM, Mosseler A, Rajora OP (2007) Extensive long-distance pollen dispersal in a fragmented landscape maintains genetic diversity in white spruce. J Hered 97:640–645CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Peakall R, Smouse PE (2006) GENALEX6: genetic analysis in excel. Population genetic software for teaching and research. Mol Ecol Notes 6:288–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Rajora OP (1999) Genetic biodiversity impacts of silvicultural practices and phenotypic selection in white spruce. Theor Appl Genet 99:954–961CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Rajora OP, Dancik BP (2000) Population genetic structure, variation, and evolution of Engelmann spruce, white spruce and their putative natural hybrid complex in Alberta. Can J Bot 78:768–780Google Scholar
  32. Rajora OP, Mosseler A (2001a) Challenges and opportunities for conservation of forest genetic resources. Euphytica 118:197–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Rajora OP, Mosseler A (2001b) Molecular markers in conservation, restoration and sustainable management of forest genetic resources. In: Muller-Starck G, Schubert R (eds) Genetic response of forest systems to changing environmental conditions. Kluwer. Forest Sci 70: 187–201Google Scholar
  34. Rajora OP, Pluhar SA (2003) Genetic diversity impacts of forest fires, forest harvesting and alternative reforestation practices in black spruce (Picea mariana). Theor Appl Genet 106:1213–1224Google Scholar
  35. Rajora OP, Rahman MH, Buchert GP, Dancik BP (2000) Microsatellite analysis of genetic effects of harvesting in old-growth eastern white pine (Pinus strobus) in Ontario, Canada. Mol Ecol 9:339–348PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Rajora OP, Rahman MH, Dayanandan S, Mosseler A (2001) Isolation, characterization, inheritance and linkage of microsatellite DNA markers in white spruce (Picea glauca) and their usefulness in other spruce species. Mol Gen Genet 264:871–882PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Rajora OP, Mann IK, Shi YZ (2005) Genetic diversity and population structure of boreal white spruce (Picea glauca) in pristine conifer-dominated and mixed-wood forest stands. Can J Bot 83:1096–1105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. SAS Institute (2001) SAS system for Windows, Release 8.11. SAS Institute, Cary, NCGoogle Scholar
  39. Saskatchewan Ministry of Environment (2007) Forest management planning—forest planning manual. Saskatchewan Environment—Forest Service, Prince Albert, SaskatchewanGoogle Scholar
  40. Snetsinger J (2010) Chief Forester's standards for seed use—British Columbia. British Columbia Ministry of Forests, Victoria, BC, 43 ppGoogle Scholar
  41. Stebbins GL, Hartl DL (1988) Comparative evolution: latent potentials for anagenetic advance. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 85:5141–5145PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Stoehr MU, El-Kassaby Y (1997) Levels of genetic diversity at different stages of the domestication cycle of interior spruce in British Columbia. Theor Appl Genet 94:83–90PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Tan W, Blanton S, Bielech JP (2008) Summer planting performance of white spruce 1 + 0 container seedlings affected by nursery short-day treatment. New For 35:187–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Thomas BR, Macdonald SE, Hicks M, Adams DL, Hodgetts RB (1999) Effects of reforestation methods on genetic diversity of lodgepole pine: an assessment using microsatellite and randomly amplified polymorphic DNA markers. Theor Appl Genet 98(5):793–801CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Tremblay N, Simon JP (1989) Genetic structure of marginal populations of white spruce as its northern limit of distribution in Nouveau-Quebec. Can J For Res 19:1371–1379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. van Oosterhout C, Hutchinson WF, Wills DPM, Shipley P (2004) Micro-checker: software for identifying and correcting genotyping errors in microsatellite data. Mol Ecol Notes 4:535–538CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Forestry and Environmental ManagementUniversity of New BrunswickFrederictonCanada
  2. 2.Agriculture and Agri-Food CanadaFrederictonCanada

Personalised recommendations