Vers une culture durable de l’ail des boisVers une culture durable de l’ail des bois Pierre-Paul...

Vers une culture durable de l’ail

des bois

Pierre-Paul DION et Line LAPOINTE

Programme de soutien à

l’innovation en agroalimentaire

Colloque sur les champignons

forestiers et autres PFNL

Wild leek: Allium tricoccum Ait.

Bio

dôm

e M

ontr

éal

Spring ephemeral herb

Early senescence

Reproduction mostly asexual

Slow growth

Bulb very popular

Populations declined in the 1980s

Protection by provincial law since 1995

Jones 1979; Couillard 1995; Dagenais 1985; Nault & Gagnon 1993

Introduction Culture

establishment

Maintenance Conclusion Harvest

Laws An Act respecting threatened or vulnerable species

Article 16: “No person may have any specimen of a threatened or vulnerable plant species

or any of its parts, including its progeny, in his possession outside its natural

environment, or harvest, exploit, mutilate, destroy, acquire, transfer, offer to transfer or

genetically manipulate it”

Article 17: “No person may, in the habitat of a threatened or vulnerable plant species, carry

on an activity that may alter the existing ecosystem, the present biological diversity

or the physical or chemical components peculiar to that habitat.”

Regulation respecting threatened or vulnerable plant species and their habitats

Article 4: “Despite the prohibitions referred to in section 16 of the Act respecting threatened

or vulnerable species (chapter E-12.01), a person may have wild leek (Allium tricoccum

var. tricoccum and Allium tricoccum var. burdickii) in his or her possession outside its natural

environment or may harvest it for the purposes of personal consumption in an annual

quantity not exceeding 200 g of any of its parts or a maximum of 50 bulbs or 50

plants, provided that those activities do not take place in [a park, reserve or conservation

area]”.


establishment


Demography

Slow reproduction

Low harvest rates recommended in natural populations

Between 10% per 10 years and 8 % per year

Culture?

Forest farming

Davis & Greenfiled 2002; Bernatchez & Lapointe 2013; Nantel et al 1996; Nault & Gagnon

1993; Rock et al 2004)


establishment


eFloras

Site selection Typically in maple forests

With Tilia or Carya

Rich soil

Good to average drainage, but

high soil moisture

pH ~6, acid tolerant

Asarum

canadense L. Trillium

grandiflorum

(Michx.) Salisb


establishment Maintenance Conclusion Harvest

Lavallée 1978; Vasseur & Gagnon 1994

Dicentra

canadensis

(Goldie) Walp

© Flore Laurentienne

Light Germination and survival of

seedlings better in forest

Faster growth under high

light conditions

DIfficult to assess in natural

populations

Fontaine & Brisson, unpublished data; Vasseur & Gagnon 1994

Davis & Greenfield 2002

Effect F Value Pr > F

Light 0.91 0.406

Year 82.47 <.001

L*Y 3.23 0.045



Canopy

2 components of total light:

Light under closed canopy

Canopy phenology

Canopy closure index = late canopy closure

Dion, Bussières et Lapointe (in preparation)



Density

Natural density:

Mean: 90 bulbs m-2

Up to 350-400 bulbs m-2



Dion , Bussières & Lapointe (en rédaction); Ritchey & Schumann 2004

Annual pro

ductivity (

g m

-2 y

r-1)

yr

2 t

o 4

0

50

100

150

Bulb

wid

th (

cm

) Y

r 5

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

Planting density (bulbs m-2

)

44 89 178 356

Indiv

idual to

tal le

af

wid

th (

cm

) yr

4

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Planting density (bulbs m-2

)

44 89 178 356

Bulb

num

ber

per

plo

t Y

r 4

0

50

100

150

b

b

ab

a

aa a

b

a

ab

b b

a aab

b

Amendment Proposed fertilisation:

N - P2O5 - K2O (55 – 110 – 82.5 kg ha-1)

Gypsum: 3000 kg ha -1



Bernatchez, Bussières & Lapointe 2013

Amendment Ca amendment (gypsum) positive effect when soil poor in Ca

Wild leek leaves rich in Ca

Acid-tolerant

Lime efficient when soil pH ~ 4

Ritchey & Schumann 2005

Bernatchez, Bussières & Lapointe 2013; Davis & Greenfield 2001; Nault & Gagnon

1988; Ritchey & Schumann 2005



Litter and sylvicultural practices

Dion, Bussières &

Lapointe (in progress)

Bernatchez &

Lapointe 2012

Facelli & Pickett 1991

Effect of litter on soil environment and wild leek survival

Selection Cutting

Effect on light environment

No effect on soil humidity

No short term effect on wild leek growth

Recommendations:

60 m buffer zone when risk of furrow formation

or when removing > 35% canopy

Ph

oto

:Dela

gra

ng

e,

Bla

nch

et &

Rio

pe

l, 2

01

3

Delagrange, Blanchet & Riopel, 2013



Bulbs Recommended annual

harvest rates:

< 10% (Nault & Gagnon,

1993)

8 % (Nantel, Gagnon &

Nault, 1996)

10% per 10 years (Rock,

Beckage & Gross, 2004)

Climatic variability

Scattered harvest



Rock, Beckage & Gross 2004

Leaves

Effect F P

Nb leaves (L) 138.4 < 0.001

Nb days (D) 30.3 < 0.001

Year (Y) 93.6 < 0.001

L × D 7.21 0.001

L × Y 3.27 0.038

D × Y 0.83 0.504

L × D × Y 0.28 0.891

Yr 2

Yr 1

Yr 3

Significant effect of the number of harvested leaves and of

the timing of the harvest

Difficult to recommend a precise frequency of harvest

Dion, Bussières & Lapointe (in preparation)



Days before harvesting

15 20 25

Bulb

wid

th (

cm)

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8


15 20 25

Bulb

wid

th (

cm)

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8


15 20 25

Bulb

wid

th (

cm)

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

Practical example Jean Arsenault

0.7 ha sugar maple and red oak plantation

Forest farming for medicinal and ornamental plants

225 m2 of wild leek

In 3 years from seeds:

bulbs ready for transplantation

Soil plowing, litter, fertilisation, weeding... Photos: Jean Arsenault



Possible sustainable exploitation? Sustainable?

Profitable?

Harvests in...

Plantations

Natural populations

Fertilisation

Light environment

Density

Litter

Sustainable harvest rates

...

Soil plowing Optimization of

fertilisation Litter



Thank you Supervisor: Line Lapointe

All members from the Lapointe lab and members of the Centre de Recherche Agricole de Mirabel (CRAM) and MAPAQ (Blainville and Sherbrooke) for setting up the experimental plots and their much appreciated great help in field sampling

Collaborating producers and land owners

All researchers involved in wild leek research

Jean Arsenault, forest farming producer

Programme de soutien à

l’innovation en agroalimentaire

Bibliography BERNATCHEZ, A., and L. LAPOINTE. 2012. Cooler temperatures favour growth of wild leek (Allium tricoccum), a deciduous

forest spring ephemeral. Botany-Botanique 90: 1125-1132.

BERNATCHEZ, A., J. BUSSIERES, and L. LAPOINTE. 2013. Testing fertilizer, gypsum, planting season and varieties of wild leek (Allium tricoccum) in forest farming system. Agroforestry Systems 87: 977-991.

COUILLARD, L. 1995. La situation de l'ail des bois (Allium tricoccum) au Québec., Ministère de l'Environnement et de la Faune du Québec.

DAGENAIS, J. 1985. Rapport sur la situation de l'ail des bois (Allium tricoccum) au Québec. Association des biologistes du Québec.

DAVIS, J. M., and J. GREENFIELD. 2002. Cultivating ramps: Wild leeks of Appalachia. In J. Janick AND A. Whipkey [eds.], 449-452. ASHS Press, Alexandria.

DELAGRANGE, S., J. BLANCHET, and M. RIOPEL. 2013. Évaluation de la sensibilité de l'ail des bois (Allium tricoccum) à la coupe de jardinage. Institut des Sciences de la Forêt, Nova Sylva.

FACEMIRE, G. 2008. Having your ramps and eating them too. McClain Printing Company, Parsons, West Virginia.

LAVALLÉE, R. 1978. Quelques aspects de la biologie de l'ail des bois. B. Sc., Université Laval.

JONES, A. G. 1979. A study of wild leek, and the recognition of Allium burdickii (Liliaceae). Systematic Botany 4: 29-43.

NANTEL, P., D. GAGNON, and A. NAULT. 1996. Population viability analysis of american ginseng and wild leek harvested in stochastic environments. Conservation Biology 10: 608-621.

NAULT, A., and D. GAGNON. 1988. Seasonal biomass and nutrient allocation patterns in wild leek (Allium tricoccum Ait.), a spring geophyte. Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club 115: 45-54.

NAULT, A., and D. GAGNON. 1993. Ramet demography of Allium tricoccum, a spring ephemeral, perennial forest herb. Journal of Ecology 81: 101-119.

RITCHEY, K. D., and C. M. SCHUMANN. 2005. Response of woodland-planted Ramps to surface-applied calcium, planting density, and bulb preparation. HortScience 40: 1516-1520.

ROCK, J. H., B. BECKAGE, and L. J. GROSS. 2004. Population recovery following differential harvesting of Allium tricoccum Ait. in the southern Appalachians. Biological Conservation 116: 227-234.

VASSEUR, L., and D. GAGNON. 1994. Survival and growth of Allium tricoccum Ait. transplants in different habitats. Biological Conservation 68: 107-114.



Varieties

A. tricoccum var. burdickii

Thinner leaves

Faster division

Similar bulb?

var. burdickii

var. tricoccum

Bernatchez, Bussières & Lapointe 2013; Jones 1979

Ph

oto

: A

nto

ine

Be

rna

tch

ez

burdickii

tricoccum



Transplantation Autumn vs spring transplantation

Logistic vs growth

Handling:

what to do with joined bulbs?

Survival vs individual growth

Ritchey & Schumann 2005

Bern

atc

hez, B

ussiè

res &

La

poin

te 2

013

Leaf N

concentr

ation

(mg

g-1

)

Root : shoot dry

ma

ss r

atio

Year



Date post:	22-Jun-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	4 times
Download:	1 times

Vers une culture durable de l’ail des boisVers une culture durable de l’ail des bois Pierre-Paul...

Documents