New Forests

, Volume 47, Issue 6, pp 815–827 | Cite as

Impact of planting container type on growth and survival of three hybrid poplar clones in central Alberta, Canada

  • Barb R. ThomasEmail author
  • Stefan G. Schreiber
  • David P. Kamelchuk


We compared growth performance and survival of three hybrid poplar clones (Walker, Northwest and Okanese) planted as cuttings into five different Styroblock® containers (412A, 415D, 512A, 515A, 615A) with increasing cavity volume and decreasing cavity density under commercial growing conditions at two nurseries in central Alberta, Canada. After 175 days of growth, our results showed considerable variation in growth traits among container types while survival was generally high with an overall average of 89 %. Initial cutting diameter appeared to be an important predictor of survival and our results showed that a cutting diameter of ≥7.5 mm increased survival rates of the tested hybrid poplar planting stock. Furthermore, containers with larger cavity volume and lower cavity density had a strong positive influence on growth and survival across nurseries (R 2 = 0.96). Growth trait interactions with container type showed that container 512A (cavity volume: 220 ml; cavity depth: 12 cm) resulted in more diameter growth across clones. Cavities with a depth of 15 cm (415D, 515A, 615A) resulted in higher root:shoot ratios than cavities with a depth of only 12 cm (412A, 512A), irrespective of cavity volume or cavity density. Lastly, our study identified Okanese as a well-rounded clone with great growth potential both above and below ground. From an operational standpoint, we found container types 512A and 515A the most cost-effective choices under the assumption that nursery space and budgets are limiting factors.


Boreal forest Cavity density Cavity volume Nursery production Okanese Styroblock 



The authors would like to thank Alberta-Pacific Forest Industries Inc., (Al-Pac) for financial support of this work and Joanna Ramsum from Al-Pac and Dan McCurdy and Larry Lafleur from Coast to Coast Reforestation for their time and effort on this trial. We would also like to acknowledge all the summer students employed by Al-Pac who assisted with harvesting and washing of all plant materials, as well as two anonymous reviewers who provided helpful comments on a previous version of the manuscript.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest


Supplementary material

11056_2016_9546_MOESM1_ESM.docx (1.2 mb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 1227 kb)
11056_2016_9546_MOESM2_ESM.docx (19 kb)
Supplementary material 2 (DOCX 18 kb)
11056_2016_9546_MOESM3_ESM.xlsx (19 kb)
Supplementary material 3 (XLSX 18 kb)


  1. Anderson JA, Luckert MK (2007) Can hybrid poplar save industrial forestry in Canada?: a financial analysis in Alberta and policy considerations. For Chron 83:92–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson JA, Long A, Luckert M (2014) A financial analysis of establishing poplar plantations for carbon offsets using Alberta and British Columbia’s afforestation protocols. Can J For Res 45:207–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bates D, Mächler M, Bolker B, Walker S (2014) Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. arXiv:1406.5823
  4. Bayley AD, Kietzka JW (1997) Stock quality and field performance of Pinus patula seedlings produced under two nursery growing regimes during seven different nursery production periods. New For 13:341–356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Block RMA, Knight JD, Booth NWH, van Rees KCJ (2009) Nursery stock type, nitrogen fertilization and shoot pruning effects on the growth of juvenile hybrid poplar in Saskatchewan. Can J Plant Sci 89:289–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cai T, Price DT, Orchansky AL, Thomas BR (2011) Carbon, water, and energy exchanges of a hybrid poplar plantation during the first five years following planting. Ecosystems 14:658–671CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cooke JEK, Rood SB (2007) Trees of the people: the growing science of poplars in Canada and worldwide. Botany 85:1103–1110Google Scholar
  8. DesRochers A, Thomas BR (2003) A comparison of pre-planting treatments on hardwood cuttings of four hybrid poplar clones. New For 26:17–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. DesRochers A, Van den Driessche R, Thomas BR (2006) NPK fertilization at planting of three hybrid poplar clones in the boreal region of Alberta. For Ecol Manag 232:216–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. DesRochers A, Van Den Driessche R, Thomas BR (2007) The interaction between nitrogen source, soil pH, and drought in the growth and physiology of three poplar clones This article is one of a selection of papers published in the Special Issue on Poplar Research in Canada. Botany 85:1046–1057Google Scholar
  11. Dickmann DI, Phipps H, Netzer DA (1992) Cutting diameter influences early survival and growth of several Populus clones. USDA Forest Service, North Central Forest Experiment Station, St. Paul, Minnesota, Research Note NC-261Google Scholar
  12. Druege U (2009) Involvement of carbohydrates in survival and adventitious root formation of cuttings within the scope of global horticulture. In: Niemi K, Scagel C (eds) Adventitious root formation of forest trees and horticultural plants-from genes to applications. Research Signpost, Kerala, 187–208Google Scholar
  13. Duryea ML, Landis TD (1984) Forest nursery manual: production of bareroot seedlings. Martinus Nijhoff/Dr W. Junk Publishers, The HagueCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Grossnickle SC, Major JE, Folk RS (1994) Interior spruce seedlings compared with emblings produced from somatic embryogenesis. I. Nursery development, fall acclimation, and over-winter storage. Can J For Res 24:1376–1384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Haissig BE (1982) Carbohydrate and amino acid concentrations during adventitious root primordium development in Pinus banksiana Lamb. cuttings. For Sci 28:813–821Google Scholar
  16. Haissig BE (1984) Carbohydrate accumulation and partitioning in Pinus banksiana seedlings and seedling cuttings. Physiol Plant 61:13–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hansen EA, Tolsted DN (1981) Effect of cutting diameter and stem or branch position on establishment of a difficult-to-root clone of a Populus alba hybrid. Can J For Res 11:723–727CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Henkel-Johnson D (2013) Factors regulating tree-herb competition in young hybrid poplar plantations. Department of Renewable Resources, MSc. University of Alberta, EdmontonGoogle Scholar
  19. Jarvis JM (1968) Silviculture and management of natural poplar stands. Growth and Utilization of Poplars in Canada. Minister of Forestry and Rural Development, Ottawa Dep. Publ, pp 70–77Google Scholar
  20. Johnston M, Kulshreshtha S, Baumgartner T (2001) Agroforestry in the prairie landscape: opportunities for climate change mitigation through carbon sequestration. Prairie Forum 25:195–213Google Scholar
  21. Johnston M, Kulshreshtha S, Baumgartner T (2002) Carbon sequestration on privately owned marginal agricultural lands: an ecological—economic analysis of afforestation in Saskatchewan. In: Shaw CH, Apps MJ (eds) The role of boreal forests and forestry in the global carbon budget. Northern Forestry Centre, Canadian Forest Service, Edmonton, Alberta, pp 73–82Google Scholar
  22. Kalcsits LA, Silim S, Tanino K (2009) Warm temperature accelerates short photoperiod-induced growth cessation and dormancy induction in hybrid poplar (Populus× spp.). Trees 23:971–979CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Landhäusser SM, Rodriguez-Alvarez J, Marenholtz EH, Lieffers VJ (2012) Effect of stock type characteristics and time of planting on field performance of aspen (Populus tremuloides Michx.) seedlings on boreal reclamation sites. New For 43:679–693CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Larocque GR, DesRochers A, Larchevêque M, Tremblay F, Beaulieu J, Mosseler A, Major JE, Gaussiran S, Thomas BR, Sidders D (2013) Research on hybrid poplars and willow species for fast-growing tree plantations: its importance for growth and yield, silviculture, policy-making and commercial applications. For Chron 89:32–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. LeBoldus JM, Blenis PV, Thomas BR (2007) Evaluating the interaction between genotype and water stress in the hybrid poplar-Septoria musiva pathosystem This note is one of a selection of papers published in the Special Issue on Poplar Research in Canada. Botany 85:1098–1102Google Scholar
  26. Lenth RV (2015) Lsmeans: least-squares means. R package version 2.20-23.
  27. Lindquist CH, Cram WH, Howe IAG (1977) Walker poplar. Can J Plant Sci 57:1019CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. LUF (2013) Land-use framework region plans progress report—a review of our progress in 2013. Government of Alberta, Edmonton, AlbertaGoogle Scholar
  29. Navratil S, Rochon GC (1981) Enhanced root and shoot development of poplar cuttings induced by Pisolithus inoculum. Can J For Res 11:844–848CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Nelson EA, Lavender DP (1979) The chilling requirement of western hemlock seedlings. For Sci 25:485–490Google Scholar
  31. Neumann PD, Krogman NT, Krahn HJ, Thomas BR (2007) ‘My Grandfather Would Roll Over in His Grave’: family farming and tree plantations on farmland*. Rural Sociol 72:111–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Poorter H, Bühler J, van Dusschoten D, Climent J, Postma JA (2012) Pot size matters: a meta-analysis of the effects of rooting volume on plant growth. Funct Plant Biol 39:839–850CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. R Core Team (2015) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria.
  34. Riemenschneider DE (1997) Breeding and nursery propagation of cottonwood and hybrid poplars for use in intensively cultured plantations. In: Landis TD, Thompson JR, technical coordinators. National proceedings, forest and conservation nursery associations. Portland (OR): USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. General Technical Report PNWGTR-419, pp 38–42Google Scholar
  35. Robison DJ, Raffa KF (1996) Importance of cutting diameter and method of production on early growth hybrid poplar. Tree Plant Notes 47:76–80Google Scholar
  36. Saurette DD, Chang SX, Thomas BR (2008) Land-use conversion effects on CO2 emissions: from agricultural to hybrid poplar plantation. Ecol Res 23:623–633CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Schneider RR (2002) Alternative futures: Alberta’s boreal forest at the crossroads. Federation of Alberta Naturalists. Alberta Centre for Boreal Research, AlbertaGoogle Scholar
  38. Schneider RR, Hamann A, Farr D, Wang X, Boutin S (2009) Potential effects of climate change on ecosystem distribution in Alberta. Can J For Res 39:1001–1010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Schreiber SG, Hacke UG, Hamann A, Thomas BR (2011) Genetic variation of hydraulic and wood anatomical traits in hybrid poplar and trembling aspen. New Phytol 190:150–160CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Schreiber SG, Hacke UG, Chamberland S, Lowe CW, Kamelchuk D, Bräutigam K, Campbell MM, Thomas BR (2016) Leaf size serves as a proxy for xylem vulnerability to cavitation in plantation trees. Plant, Cell Environ 39:272–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Schroeder WR, Walker DS (1990) Effect of cutting position on rooting and shoot growth of two poplar clones. New For 4:281–289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Schroeder W, Soolanayakanahally R, Lindquist C (2013) Okanese poplar. Can J Plant Sci 93:1281–1283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Silim S, Nash R, Reynard D, White B, Schroeder W (2009) Leaf gas exchange and water potential responses to drought in nine poplar (Populus spp.) clones with contrasting drought tolerance. Trees 23:959–969CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. SRD (2009) Alberta Forest genetic resource management and conservation standards (FGRMS). Alberta Sustainable Resource Development, Government of Alberta, Edmonton, AlbertaGoogle Scholar
  45. Stanturf JA, van Oosten C, Netzer DA, Coleman MD, Portwood CJ (2001) Ecology and silviculture of poplar plantations. In: Dickmann DI, Isebrands JG, Eckenwalder JE, Richardson J (eds) Poplar culture in North America. NRC Research Press, National Research Council of Canada, Ottawa, pp 153–206Google Scholar
  46. Switzer GL, Nelson LE (1963) Effects of nursery fertility and density on seedling characteristics, yield, and field performance of loblolly pine (Pinus taeda L.). Soil Sci Soc Am J 27:461–464CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Talbot P, Thompson SL, Schroeder W, Isabel N (2011) An efficient single nucleotide polymorphism assay to diagnose the genomic identity of poplar species and hybrids on the Canadian prairies. Can J For Res 41:1102–1111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Thompson BE (1985) Seedling morphological evaluation: what you can tell by looking. Proceedings: evaluating seedling quality: principles, procedures, and predictive abilities of major tests. Forest Research Laboratory, Oregon State University, CorvallisGoogle Scholar
  49. van Kooten GC, Krcmar-Nozic E, Stennes B, van Gorkom R (1999) Economics of fossil fuel substitution and wood product sinks when trees are planted to sequester carbon on agricultural lands in western Canada. Can J For Res 29:1669–1678CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Veierskov B (1988) Relations between carbohydrates and adventitious root formation. In: Davis TD, Haissig BE, Sankhla N (eds) Adventitious root formation in cuttings. Dioscorides Press, PortlandGoogle Scholar
  51. Verwijst T, Lundkvist A, Edelfeldt S, Forkman J, Nordh N-E (2012) Effects of clone and cutting traits on shoot emergence and early growth of willow. Biomass Bioenergy 37:257–264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Vigl F, Rewald B (2014) Size matters?—the diverging influence of cutting length on growth and allometry of two Salicaceae clones. Biomass Bioenergy 60:130–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Wang Y, Hogg EH, Price DT, Edwards J, Williamson T (2014) Past and projected future changes in moisture conditions in the Canadian boreal forest. For Chron 90:678–691CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Wickham H (2009) ggplot2: elegant graphics for data analysis. Springer Science & Business Media, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Wickham H (2011) The split-apply-combine strategy for data analysis. J Stat Softw 40:1–29Google Scholar
  56. Wilson BC, Jacobs DF (2006) Quality assessment of temperate zone deciduous hardwood seedlings. New For 31:417–433CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Zalasky H, Fenn OK, Lindquist CH (1968) Reactions of poplars to infections by Septoria musiva and Diplodia tumefaciens and to injury by frost in Manitoba and Saskatchewan. Plant Dis Report 52:829–833Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of AlbertaEdmontonCanada
  2. 2.Little Creek AgroforestryEllscottCanada
  3. 3.Alberta-Pacific Forest Industries Inc.BoyleCanada

Personalised recommendations