Five decades of growth in a genetic field trial of Douglas-fir reveal trade-offs between productivity and drought tolerance
- 573 Downloads
To select suitable planting stock for reforestation under uncertain future climates, information about tolerances of genotypes to different climate conditions is necessary. One useful approach is to combine dendrochronological research with common garden experiments to quantify genotype by environment interactions observed over time. Here, we assess the response of Douglas-fir provenances planted in a common environment to climate variation over five decades using tree-ring analysis and historic height data. A rare drought event that affected growth in the year of 1985 provided the opportunity to study how mature Douglas-fir provenances differ in resilience and resistance to drought conditions and whether there are trade-offs with long-term productivity. We found that overall growth performance of provenances originating from drier and colder environments within the coastal range was below average and correlated with interannual variation in temperature. Productive provenances originated primarily from moist and warm areas and their annual increments covaried strongly with summer precipitation and summer drought indices. Further, provenances with below average growth were able to recover more quickly from the drought event of 1985, but did not show stronger drought resistance than coastal sources. Our results provide evidence for trade-offs between productivity and drought resilience and show that sources originating from moist locations are more dependent on favorable growing conditions in the summer. We conclude that selecting drought-resilient planting stock as an adaptation strategy for climate change is possible, but it would entail reductions in productivity.
KeywordsDrought response Resilience Plasticity Adaptation Assisted migration Tree-rings
The authors are very thankful to Ionut Aron of the Malcolm Knapp Research Forest and Bruce Larson of the University of British Columbia for support with research logistics. They are also very grateful for Miriam Isaac-Renton’s comments and Anja Litka’s field assistance. David Montwé is supported by scholarship funds from the State Graduate Funding Program of Baden-Württemberg. Two anonymous reviewers helped to improve an earlier version of this manuscript.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Data archiving statement
Height and diameter data is available from the Center of Forest Provenance Data ( http://cenforgen.forestry.oregonstate.edu/retrieve/DataRetrieve.php?study_id=1 ). Tree-ring, height and diameter data is made available as an electronic supplement to this publication (Montwe_et_al_2015_TGGE.xlsx).
- Bansal S, Harrington CA, Gould PJ, St. Clair JB (2014) Climate-related genetic variation in drought-resistance of Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii). Glob Chang Biol 1–12. doi: 10.1111/gcb.12719
- Bates D, Maechler M, Bolker B (2013) lme4: linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes. R Package version 1.0–4. http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/lme4/index.html
- Ching KK (1965) Early growth of Douglas-fir in a reciprocal planting. Corvallis, Or For Manag Res For Res Lab Oregon State Univ 1–20Google Scholar
- Ching KK, Bever D (1960) Provenance study of Douglas Fir in the Pacific Northwest region. 1. Nursery performance. Silvae Genet 9:11–17Google Scholar
- Dalla-Salda G, Martinez-Meier A, Cochard H, Rozenberg P (2009) Variation of wood density and hydraulic properties of Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii (Mirb.) Franco) clones related to a heat and drought wave in France. For Ecol Manag 257:182–189. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2008.08.019 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Fritts HC (2001) Tree rings and climate. Blackburn Press The Blackb:567. doi: 10.1038/scientificamerican0572-92
- Kuznetsova A, Brockhoff P, Christensen R (2013) lmerTest: tests for random and fixed effects for linear mixed effect models (lmer objects of lme4 package). R package version 2.0–3Google Scholar
- Lawrence WH, Rediske JH, Lawrence H (1962) Fate of sown Douglas-fir seed. For Sci 8:210–218Google Scholar
- Little EL (1971) Atlas of United States trees: Vol. 1. Conifers and important hardwoods. US Dep Agric Misc Publ 1146 1–877Google Scholar
- R Core Team (2013) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. http://www.R-project.org/
- Regent Instruments Canada Inc. (2012) WinDendro for tree-ring analysis WinDendro Reference Manual, Version 2012b, June 27, 2012. Regent Instruments Inc, Québec, CanadaGoogle Scholar
- Rehfeldt GE, Leites LP, Bradley St. Clair J et al (2014) Comparative genetic responses to climate in the varieties of Pinus ponderosa and Pseudotsuga menziesii: clines in growth potential. For Ecol Manag 324:138–146. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2014.02.041
- St. Clair JB, Howe GT (2007) Genetic maladaptation of coastal Douglas-fir seedlings to future climates. Glob Chang Biol 13:1441–1454. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2486.2007.01385.x
- St. Clair JB, Mandel NL, Vance-Borland KW (2005) Genecology of Douglas fir in western Oregon and Washington. Ann Bot 96:1199–1214. doi: 10.1093/aob/mci278
- White T, Ching K (1985) Provenance study of Douglas-fir in the Pacific Northwest Region IV. Field performance at age 25 years. Silvae Genet 34:84–90Google Scholar
- Wykoff RW, Crookston NL, Stage AR (1982) User’s guide to the stand prognosis model. USDA For. Serv., GTR-INT-133, p. 112Google Scholar