Skip to main content
Log in

Multiple-population versus hierarchical conifer breeding programs: a comparison of genetic diversity levels

  • Published:
Theoretical and Applied Genetics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Advanced-generation domestication programs for forest-tree species has raised some concerns about the maintenance of genetic diversity in forest-tree breeding programs. Genetic diversity in natural stands was compared with two genetic conservation options for a third-generation elite Pinus taeda breeding population. The breeding population was subdivided either on the basis of geographic origin and selection goals (multiple-population or MPBS option) or stratified according to genetic value (hierarchical or HOPE option). Most allelic diversity in the natural stands of loblolly pine is present in the domesticated breeding populations. This was true at the aggregate level for both multiple-population (MPBS) and the hierarchical (HOPE) populations. Individual subpopulations within each option had less genetic diversity but it did not decline as generations of improvement increased. Genetic differentiation within the subdivided breeding populations ranged from 1 to 5%, genetic variability is within each subpopulation rather than among subpopulations for both MPBS (>95%) and the HOPE approaches (>98%). Nei's Gst estimates for amongpopulation differentiation were biased upwards relative to estimates of θ from Weir and Cockerham (1984).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bachmann K (1994) Molecular markers in plant ecology. New Phytol 126:403–418

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnes RD (1984) A multiple population breeding strategy for Zimbabwe. In: Barnes RD, Gibson GL (eds) Proceedings IUFRO provenance and genetic improvement strategies in tropical forest trees. Commonwealth Forestry Institute, Oxford UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Bramel-Cox PJ, Cox TS (1988) Use of wild germplasm in sorghum improvement. 43rd Annual Corn and Sorghum Conference 43: 13–26

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Brown AHD (1989) Core collections: a practical approach to genetic resources management. Genome 31:818–824

    Google Scholar 

  • Burdon RD, Namkoong G (1983) Short note: multiple populations and sublines. Silvae Genet 32:221–222

    Google Scholar 

  • Cockerham CC, Weir BS (1993) Estimation of gene flow from Fstatistics. Evolution 47:855–863

    Google Scholar 

  • Cotterill PP (1984) A plan for breeding radiata pine. Silvae Genet 33: 84–90

    Google Scholar 

  • Crow JF, Kimura M (1970) An introduction to population genetics theory. Harper and Row, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Eriksson G, Namkoong G, Roberds JH (1994) Dynamic gene conservation for uncertain futures. For Ecol Management 62: 15–37

    Google Scholar 

  • Groover AT, Devey M, Fiddler T, Lee J, Megraw R, Mitchell-Olds T, Sherman B, Vujcic S, Williams CG, Neale DB (1994) Identification of quantitative trait loci influencing wood specific gravity in an outbred pedigree of loblolly pine. Genetics 138(4): 1293–1300

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamrick JL, Godt MJW, Sherman-Broyles SL (1992) Factors affecting levels of genetic diversity in woody plant species. New Forests 6:95–124

    Google Scholar 

  • Kannenberg LW (1984) Utilization of genetic diversity in crop breeding. In: Yeatman CW, Kafton D, Wilkes G (eds) Plant genetic resources: a conservation imperative, AAAS Selected Symposium 87th edn. Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado

    Google Scholar 

  • Kidd G (1993) Analyzing the U.S. corn-genetics business. Biotechnology 11(9): 980

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis PO, Whitkus R (1989) GENESTAT for microcomputers. Am Soc Plant Taxon Newslett 2:15–16

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindgren D, Gregorius H (1976) Inbreeding and coancestry. In: Proceedings, IUFRO Joint Meeting on Advanced Generation Breeding, Bordeaux France, pp 49–72

  • Lowe WJ, van Buijtenen JP (1986) The development of a sublining system in an operational tree improvement program. In: Proceedings IUFRO Conference on Breeding theory, Progeny testing and Seed Orchards, Williamsburg, Virginia, pp 98–106

  • Mahalovich MF (1989) Modelling positive assortative mating and elite populations in recurrent selection programs for general combining ability. PhD dissertation, NC State University, Raleigh, North Carolina

    Google Scholar 

  • McKeand SE, Bridgwater FE (1992) Third-generation breeding strategy for the North Carolina State University-Industry cooperative tree improvement program. In: Proceedings, IUFRO Conference on Breeding Tropical Trees, pp 234–240

  • McKeand SE, Li B, Hatcher A, Weir RJ (1988) Stability parameter estimates for sstem volume for loblolly pine families growing in regions in southeastern U.S. For Sci 38(1): 10–17

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitton JB, Linhart YB, Sturgeon KB, Hamrick JL (1979) Allozyme polymorphism detected in mature needle tissue of ponderosa pine. JHered 70:86–89

    Google Scholar 

  • Moran GF, Bell JC, Eldridge KG (1988) The genetic structure and genetic conservation of the five natural populations of Pinus radiata. Can J For Res 18:506–514

    Google Scholar 

  • Namkoong G (1984) A control concept of gene conservation. Silvae Genet 33:160–163

    Google Scholar 

  • Nei M (1972) Genetic distance between populations. Am Nat 106: 282–292

    Google Scholar 

  • Nei M (1973) Analysis of gene diversity in subdivided populations. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 70:3321–3323

    Google Scholar 

  • Nei M (1977) F-statistics and analysis of gene diversity in subdivided populations. Ann Hum Genet 41:225–233

    Google Scholar 

  • Nei M (1986) Definition and estimation of fixation indices. Evolution 40:643–645

    Google Scholar 

  • Nei M, Chesser RK (1983) Estimation of fixation indices and gene diversities. Ann Hum Genet 47:253–259

    Google Scholar 

  • Nei M, Roychoudhury AK (1974) Sampling variances of heterozygosity and genetic distance. Genetics 76:379–390

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nei M, Maruyama T, Chakraborty R (1975) The bottleneck effect and genetic variability in populations. Evolution 29:1–10

    Google Scholar 

  • Soltis DE, Haufler CH, Darrow DC, Gastony GC (1983) Starchgel electrophoresis of ferns: a compilation of grinding buffers, gel and electrode buffers and staining schedules. Am Fern Jour 73:9–27

    Google Scholar 

  • Weir BS (1990) Genetic data analyses. Sinauer, Sunderland, Massachusetts

    Google Scholar 

  • Weir BS, Cockerham CC (1984) Estimating F-statistics for the analysis of population structure. Evolution 38:1358–1370

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams CG, Lambeth CC (1993) Experimental elite population using Pinus taeda L. In: Proceedings, IUFRO Conference on Breeding Tropical Trees, Cali Colombia, pp 223–233

  • Williams CG, Neale DB (1992) Conifer wood quality and markerassisted selection: a case study. Can J For Res 22:1009–1017

    Google Scholar 

  • Workman PL, Niswander JD (1970) Population studies on southwestern Indian tribes. II. Local genetic differentiation in the Papago. Am J Hum Genet 22:24–49

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wright S (1931) Evolution in Mendelian populations. Genetics 16: 97–159

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright S (1943) Isolation by distance. Genetics 28:114–138

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright S (1965) The interpretation of population structure by F-statistics with special regard to systems of mating. Evolution 19:355–420

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright S (1977) Evolution and the genetics of populations, vol 3. Experimental results and evolutionary deductions. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

Communicated by P. M. A. Tigerstedt

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Williams, C.G., Hamrick, J.L. & Lewis, P.O. Multiple-population versus hierarchical conifer breeding programs: a comparison of genetic diversity levels. Theoret. Appl. Genetics 90, 584–594 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00222007

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00222007

Key words

Navigation