Advertisement

Journal of Genetics

, Volume 92, Issue 1, pp 141–145 | Cite as

Changes in genetic diversity parameters in unimproved and improved populations of teak (Tectona grandis L.f.) in Karnataka state, India

  • N. LYNGDOHEmail author
  • GEETA JOSHI
  • G. RAVIKANTH
  • R. VASUDEVA
  • R. UMA SHAANKER
RESEARCH NOTE

Introduction

Teak (Tectona grandis L. f.; family Verbanaceae) is an important plantation tree species in the tropics and in India one of the first species to be prioritized for improvement. Improvement efforts for the last 50 years have essentially concentrated on augmenting quality seed production by establishing seed production areas (SPA) and clonal seed orchards (CSO). Presently, these two form the main sources of quality planting material for teak throughout the country. However, there is no information on the genetic quality of such sources nor information on the progeny used in plantation programmes. Reports of studies based on coniferous and tropical species provide conflicting results on the impact of domestication on the genetic diversity of populations (Chaisurisri and El Kassaby, 1994; Rajora, 1999; Moran et al., 2000; Godt et al., 2001; Icgen et al., 2006). Also the impact of domestication on the genetic diversity of progeny populations is poorly understood (Stoehr and...

Keywords

ISSR progeny diversity parent diversity tree improvement 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank Director, Group Coordinator (Research), and Head of Department, Tree Improvement and Propagation Division, Institute of Wood Science and Technology, Bangalore, for the facilities provided, and Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) for providing scholarship to the first author. Assistance and field support provided by research wing of Karnataka Forest Department is acknowledged.

References

  1. Adams W. T., Zuo J., Shimizu J. Y. and Tappeiner J. C. 1998 Impact of alternative regeneration methods on genetic diversity in coastal Douglas-fir. For. Sci. 44, 390–396.Google Scholar
  2. Buchert G. P., Rajora O. P., Hood J. V. and Dancik B. P. 1997 Effects of harvesting on genetic diversity in old-growth eastern white pine in Ontario, Canada. Conserv. Biol. 11, 747–758.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chaisurisri K. and El Kassaby Y. A. 1994 Genetic diversity in seed production population vs natural populations of Picea sitchensis. Biodiversity Conserv. 3, 512–523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Doyle J. J. and Doyle J. S. 1987 A rapid DNA isolation procedure for small quantities of fresh tissues. Phytochem. Bull. 19, 11–15.Google Scholar
  5. Finkeldey R. and Mátyás G. 1999 Assessment of population history and adaptive potentials by means of gene markers. In Forest genetics and sustainability (ed. C. Matyas), pp. 91–104. Kluwer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  6. Godt M. J. W., Hamrick J. L., Edwards-Burke M. A. and Williams J. H. 2001 Comparison of genetic diversity in white spruce (Picea glauca) and jack pine (Pinus banksiana) seed orchards with natural populations. Can. J. For. Res. 31, 943–949.Google Scholar
  7. Gunaga R. P., Vasudeva R., Hanumantha M. and Swaminath M. H. 1999 Blooming variation among clones of different provenances in teak. My For. 35, 237–247.Google Scholar
  8. Hawley G. J., Schaberg P. G., DeHayes D. H. and Brissette J. C. 2005 Silviculture lters the genetic structure of an eastern hemlock forest in Maine, USA. Can. J. For. Res. 35, 143–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Icgen Y., Kaya Z., Cengel B., Velioglǔa E., Ozturka H. and Onde S. 2006 Potential impact of forest management and tree improvement on genetic diversity of Turkish red pine (Pinus brutia Ten.) plantations in Turkey. For. Ecol. Manage. 225, 328–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Jones T. H., Steane D. A., Jones R. C., Pilbeam D., Vaillancourt R. E. and Potts B. M. 2006 Effect of domestication on the genetic diversity of Eucalyptus globulus. For. Ecol. Manage. 234, 78–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Leberg P. L. 1992 Effects of population bottle necks on genetic diversity as measured by allozyme electrophoresis. Evolution 46, 477–494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lyngdoh N., Gunaga R. P., Geeta Joshi, Vasudeva R., Ravikanth G. and Uma Shaanker R. 2012 Influence of geographic distance and genetic dissimilarity among clones on flowering synchrony in a Teak (Tectona grandis L.f) clonal seed orchard. Silvae Genet. 61, 10–17.Google Scholar
  13. Lyngdoh N., Gunaga R. P. and Vasudeva R. 2007 Delineation of teak clones through leaf descriptors. Indian J. For. 30, 21–28.Google Scholar
  14. Medri C., Ruas P. M., Higa A. R., Murakami M. and de Fatima Raus C. 2003 Effects of forest management on the genetic diversity in a population of Araucaria angustifolia (Bert.) O. Kuntze. Silvae Genet. 52, 202–205.Google Scholar
  15. Moran G. F., Butcher P. A. and Glaubitz J. C. 2000 Application of genetic markers in domestication conservation and utilisation of genetic resources of Australasian tree species. Aust. J. Bot. 48, 313–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Neale D. B. 1985 Genetic implications of shelterwood regeneration of Douglasfir in southwest Oregon. For. Sci. 31, 995–1005.Google Scholar
  17. Neale D. B. and Adams W. T. 1985 The mating system in natural and shelterwood stands in Douglas-fir. Theor. Appl. Genet. 71, 201–207.Google Scholar
  18. Peakall R. and Smouse P. E. 2006 GENALEX 6: genetic analysis in Excel. Population genetic software for teaching and research. Mol. Ecol. Notes 6, 288–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Prabha S. S., Indira E. P. and Nair P. N. 2011 Contemporary gene flow and mating system analysis in natural teak forest using microsatellite markers. Curr. Sci. 101, 1213–1219.Google Scholar
  20. Rajora O. P. 1999 Genetic biodiversity impacts of silvicultural practices and phenotypic selection in white spruce. Theor. Appl. Genet. 99, 954–961.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Rajora O. P., Rahman M. H., Buchert G. P. and Dancik B. P. 2000 Microsatellite DNA analysis of genetic effects of harvesting in old-growth eastern white pine (Pinus strobes) in Ontario, Canada. Mol. Ecol. 9, 339–348.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Schmitdtling R. C. and Hiplins V. 1998 Genetic diversity in longleaf pine (Pinus palustris) influence of historical and prehistorical events. Can. J. For. Res. 28, 1135–1145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Stoehr M. U. and El-Kassaby Y. A. 1997 Levels of genetic diversity at different stages of the domestication cycle of interior spruce in British Columbia. Theor. Appl. Genet. 94, 83–90.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Tangmitcharoen S., Takaso T., Siripatanadilox S., Tasen W. and Owens J. N. 2006 Behavior of major insect pollinators of teak (Tectona grandis L. f.): A comparison of clonal seed orchard versus wild trees. For. Ecol. Manage. 222, 67–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Wendell J. F. and Weeden N. F. 1989 Visualization and interpretation of plant isozymes. In Isozymes in plant biology, vol. 4 in Advances of Plant Science Series (ed. D. E. Soltis and P. S. Soltis), pp. 5–45. Dioscorides Press, Portland, Oregon.Google Scholar
  26. Yeh F. C. H. and Boyle T. J. B. 1997 POPGENE version 1.2 Microsoft Windows-based software for population genetics analysis. University of Alberta, Alberta. 505pp.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Indian Academy of Sciences 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • N. LYNGDOH
    • 1
    Email author
  • GEETA JOSHI
    • 1
  • G. RAVIKANTH
    • 2
  • R. VASUDEVA
    • 3
  • R. UMA SHAANKER
    • 2
    • 4
    • 5
  1. 1.Tree Improvement and Propagation DivisionInstitute of Wood Sciences and TechnologyBangaloreIndia
  2. 2.Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the EnvironmentRoyal EnclaveBangaloreIndia
  3. 3.Department of Forest Biology and Tree ImprovementCollege of ForestrySirsiIndia
  4. 4.School of Ecology and Conservation, and Department of Crop PhysiologyUniversity of Agricultural SciencesBangaloreIndia
  5. 5.Department of Crop PhysiologyUniversity of Agricultural SciencesBangaloreIndia

Personalised recommendations