Douglas-fir breeding in France
TREEBREEDEX workshopHann. Münden
march 26/27. 2009J.C. BASTIEN D. MICHAUD
Douglas-fir, a successful introduction
• Described in 1772 by Archibald Menzies
• Introduced in Europe by David Douglas in 1827
• Introduced en France in 1848
• Covers today more than 400 000 in France
Pseudotsuga menziesii (Mirb.) Franco
• Presently increasing surface
361 000
390 000
330 000
200419991993
200 000
220 000
240 000
260 000
280 000
300 000
320 000
340 000
360 000
380 000
400 000
Surfa
ces
(ha)
Source France Douglas
Douglas-fir, a successful introduction Douglas-fir in France : a young massif
0
10 000
20 000
30 000
40 000
50 000
60 000 0
- 4
5-
9
10-
14
15-
19
20-
24
25-
29
30-
34
35-
39
40-
44
45-
49
50-
54
55-
59
60-
64
65-
69
70-
74
75-
79
80-
84
Classes d'âge
Surf
ace
(ha)
400 000 ha
Standing volume : 88 millions m3
Annual volume increment : 6,6 million m3 (17 m3/ha/y)
Age classes
Source France Douglas
Douglas-fir, a successful introduction An increasing harvest since 1990
Volume (m3)
Source France Douglas
Douglas-fir, a successful introduction Expected annual DF wood volume production in 2030 in France :
Round wood volume close to 6 millions m3
Sawn volume will be close to 3 millions m3
1990 20021996 2008
2014 2020 2026 - 2029
0
500 000
1 000 000
1 500 000
2 000 000
2 500 000
3 000 000
en m3Evolution prévisionnelle de la production nationale de sciagesExpected Douglas-fir sawn volume (m3)
Source France Douglas
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035
Dis
poni
bilit
é (x
100
0 m
3 /an)
Petits Bois Bois MoyensGros Bois Très Gros BoisTotal Simulation hors tempête
Expected Douglas-fir round wood volume (m3)
Douglas-fir, a successful introduction Other attractive characteristics
• No major pest
• Rather drought tolerant
• High wood stiffness
Modulus of elasticity (MPA)
Mean ring width (mm)• Natural regeneration
Breeding objectives
• Lowlands reforestation (up to 1000 m)
• Target traits : Adaptive traits :
- Lateness of bud flushing- GxE stability
Growth : rotation 35-50 years Architecture :
- Reduced forking rate- Reduced branch number & size
Wood properties : maintained (density)
Evolution of Douglas-fir breeding programs in France
• Phase 1 (1985) : evaluation of the natural variability- Provenance tests Selection of seed sources :
French artificial seed standsUS natural identified seed sources (seed zones)
- Conservation of valuable gene pools - Plantation of seed orchards
• Phase 2 (1985 ) : building up a breeding population for long term breeding- EU cooperative DF breeding program (Be, Es, Fr, Ge, It, UK): Evaluation network of about 1000 open pollinated progenies sampled in the best identified seed sources.- Seed orchards evaluation
Natural variability
INRA provenances tests planted 1954 through 1992
• 1954 – 1969 commercial origins BC, Wa, Or. : 6 tests• 1970 – 1977 IUFRO (range wide) : 23 tests• 1981 Intensive INRA / NFV Wash. collection : 3 sites• 1989 – 1992 USFS Ca. provenance collection : 4 sites
TOTAL for INRA: 36 test sites on 115 haTOTAL for FCBA : 18 test sites on 27 ha
Natural variability
Lateness of bud flushing
IUFRO douglas-fir provenances in Peyrat le Château
25°
30°
35°
40°
50°
45°
60°
Growth
European IUFRO test sites
(Breidenstein et al, 1990)15 countries – 108 tests sites
Natural variability
39°43°47°51°
Height grade depending on latitude of provenance siteBreidenstein et al. 1990
X = Coastal prov. (Each provenance is tested on more than 15 sites) = Intermediate prov. = Interior prov.
British Columbia Washington Oregon Californie11
2
3
4
Hei
ght G
rade
Latitude N 55°
Natural variability
Natural variability
• Clinal variation : growth vs elevation
Mazerollas douglas-fir IUFRO provenance testProvenance’s total height at age 8 vs origin’s elevation
(source FCBA)TH (cm)
200
250
300
350
150
200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 Altitude (m)
Humptulips Wa. coast
Santiam Or. altitude
Strong instability of Californian populations
Across space
Acro
ss y
ears
Peyrat
Orléans²
Vic en B.
Stability across space (3 sites) and time of 108 IUFRO provenances
25°
30°
35°
40°
50°
45°
60°
Strong sensitivity of southern interior DF to Swiss Needlecast
Embryos
Spain Ger Fra Ita Sco Eng
1014 Eagle Bay (BC) 0.190 0.186 0.1531023 J. Landing (BC) 0.170 0.118 0.170 0.1601030 Squamish (BC) 0.135 0.103 0.0951050 Marble Mount (WA)
0.135 0.114 0.120 0.101 0.072 0.128 0.116
1051 Sedro Wooley (WA)
0.163 0.157 0.136 0.153 0.154 0.134
1054 Arlington (WA) 0.175 0.150 0.064 0.145 0.1211083 Packwood (WA) 0.149 0.138 0.134 0.132 0.1321094 Vernonia (WA) 0.119 0.101 0.018 0.1181118 M. Peak (OR) 0.186 0,176 0.153
Test Sites Precip. (mm) Temp. °C (1) (2) (1) (2)
(Sco) Craigvenean 1000 430 8.4 12.2(Eng) Dean 1000 430 9.9 13.6(Ger) Bederkesa 750 400 8.0 13.0(Fra) Mazerollas 1200 630 10.1 14.6(Esp) Siera del Eje 1380 310 8.5 11.9(Ita) Faltona 780 470 13.0 15.0
(1)= annual (2) = Vegetation period40 to 50 trees sampled per prov. & per test site
Gene pool differentiation of 8 IUFRO populations and differentiation of these provenances established in 6 European test sites at age 23-25 years
(Isoenzymes LAP, GOT-B,GOT-A, SKDH, GDH and PGM-B)(EUDIREC Project – 1999)
IUFRO Provenances
EU common Douglas-fir base populationsSampling areasin the natural range
Evaluation network in EU (1997)
45° N
50° N
40° N
Wa. : 637 progeniesOr. : 358 progenies
55° N
Plantation dates : 1989 - 1997Total surface : 265 haNb of sites : 58
50° N
45° N
DarringtonArlington
WA.
Ecouves(400 m) Darney
(330 m)
Ronno(730 m)
Valmate(400 m)
Arfons(690 m)
IUFRO
3.8
4
4.2
4.4
4.6
4.8
5
Tota
l hei
ght (
m)
ARRD IUFRO IUFRO NOMT1 NOMT2 RNMT SKPR USFSARLINGTON DARINGTON
50° N
45° N
DarringtonArlington
WA.
Example of genetic variation within population
Darrington/Arlington 192 progenies 5 sites – age 9
Example of genetic parameters(Darrington/Arlington 192 progenies – 5 sites – age 9)
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Tot. h
eight
Flushing
Forking
Br. an
gle
Br. sco
re
Sinuosity
h2i1rg
-1
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0..8
1
Favorable Unfavorable
Flush.Fork.
Angle Branch. Sinuos.Flush. Fork.Height
EcouvesDarneyRonnoArfonsValmate
Efficiency of farm field test for early prediction(example height growth – Darrington – 40 HS families )
0
0,1
0,2
0,3
0,4
0,5
0,6
0,7
0,8
0,9
Valmate Ecouves Ronno Darney Rialsesses
Orléans CHI Orléans CPSL Peyrat CHI Peyrat CPSL Orl+Pey CPSL
Ran
k C
orre
latio
n be
twee
n fa
mily
mea
ns
Height Growth++ --
0.60
Observation period2 Farm field tests : 2-6 years5 Forest sites: 11 years
Experimental Sites
Ecouves(400 m)
Darney(330 m)
Ronno(730 m)
Valmate(400 m)
Orléans(150 m)
Peyrat(650 m)
Rialsesse(650 m)
CHI : cumulate height incrementCPSL : cumulate primary shoot length
0
0,1
0,2
0,3
0,4
0,5
0,6
0,7
0,8
0,9
1
Valmate Ronno Ecouves Darney
OrléansPeyratOrl+Pey
correlation between family means
0
0,1
0,2
0,3
0,4
0,5
0,6
0,7
0,8
0,9
1
Valmate Ronno Ecouves Darney
OrléansPeyratOrl+Pey
Height Growth++
Efficiency of farm field test for early prediction(example forking– Darrington – 40 HS families )
Predictors = % polyc. trees + % SSL/ASL + Nb. yrs with defects
French douglas-fir seed stands and conservation network(Cemagref)
• Seed stands (stat. oct. 2008)
Régions of provenance
Number of stands Surface (ha)
PME901-France low elevation 142 364PME902-France « altitude » 15 36
TOTAL 157 400
A significant proportion of these stands is getting older, with erratic fructification
• Ex situ conservation network of D.F. authentified provenances :
38 populations426 ha
Clonal Seed Orchards Nb clones Surface (ha) Plantation date Category Potential production
Darrington-VG 70 13,7 1978 & 1990 Tested 100 kg Luzette-VG 350 35,5 1981 Tested 350 kg Washington 1-VG 370 7,6 1984 & 1987 Qualified 100 kg Washington 2-VG 137 8,5 1983 Qualified 100 kg Californie-VG 108 5,5 1986 – 1992 Qualified 100 kg France 1,2,3-VG 443 21,5 1989 – 1991 Qualified 200 kg Total 1478 92,3 950 kg
45° N
50° N
40° N
Origins of the clones present in the French S.O.
Efficiency of stimulation treatments on cone production, seed yield and seed genetic quality in Douglas-fir seed orchards (source Cemagref)
6 1
75
47
190
641
1 2 3
ControlGirdling +GA
Seed production (kg/ha)
Cone production (hl/ha)
Seed yield (kg/hl)
0
25
50
75
100
0 25 50 75 100
Cumulative % clones
Cum
ulat
ive
Pi
Control
GA
G+GA
ideal
Mi = (nb male strobili of parent i) . 100 total production
Fi = (nb female flowers or cones of parent i) . 100 total production
Pi = (Fi + Mi) / 2
Pi = proportional gamete contribution
24,0
24,5
25,0
25,5
26,0
26,5
27,0
1,5 1,6 1,7 1,8 1,9 2,0 2,1 2,2 2,3 2,4
Flushing (score 0 to 5)
French SeedZonee 04
Mea
n an
nula
sho
ot e
long
atio
n (c
m)
Early flushingLate flushing
Growth and flushing
Washington 403
1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
2.2
2.4
Branch number (score)
Bra
nch
thic
knes
s (s
core
)
Low density and branch thickness
Thick branches
High branch number
Branching architecture
Seed orchard evaluation (e.g. Darrington & Luzette –age 6) (Source Cemagref – ONF)
Darrington
Luzette
Darrington-VG
Luzette-VG
Washington 403
FrenchSZ 04
**
* *
*
* **
*
*
** **
*
**
**
*
**
*
*
*
***
**
*
*
** *
*
*
Main goals of the french DF breeding program
• Evaluate the performance and adaptability of existing varietiesMultilocal evaluation of existing varietiesNatural vs artificial regeneration
• Evaluate the place of DF in the context of climate changeEvolution of the bioclimatic zonesPredictor of the DF response to extreme climatic events
•Prepare the DF forest reproductive materials for tomorrow New varieties with more southern base materialDefine the structure and the management of the breeding populationNew selection objectives; interest ? feasibility ? (eg wood properties)
Evaluation network of DF french seed orchardsNew plantations – spring 2009
Traditional plantation area
High elevation
Sub-optimal area low elevation
Outside introduction area (dry site)
Demonstration plots
INRA, Cemagref, ONF, IDF
Genetic quality of a DF natural regeneration(O. Boussaid – 2008)
La Vergne seed stand
Material : 158 parents, 457 offsprings5 chloro & 5 nuclear microsatellites
Main results : • Parents and offsprings genetic diversity are quite similar• Significant pollen flow from outside the study plot• Strong genetic structuration among offsprings (70 m)• Complementary contribution of the various age classes to the offsprings genetic diversity
Conclusion : • Natural regeneration management should overpass the limits of the plot• Sylviculture will not erase the offspring’s genetic structure• A natural regeneration should take benefit of several fructification years
Wood density : a predictor of DF adaptability to extreme climatic events(A. Martinez – 2009)
0 50 100 m.
65 dead trees65 living treesOther trees
IUFRO provenance test Orleans NF (age 32)
Stem wood density (kg/m3)
Stem diameter (mm)
Living trees 468 ± 37 229 ± 40
Dead trees 457 ± 31 226 ± 40
Signif. ** ns
1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0.00
0.00
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0.00
1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Abs
olut
e va
lue
log
(p)
Late
woo
d de
nsity
(g/c
m3)
1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
-1
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
-11986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002
Abs
olut
e va
lue
log
(p)
Late
woo
d pe
rcen
tage
(%)
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
Prepare tomorrow’s forest reproductive materials (options )G
ENTI
C G
AIN
1000 US 85 progenies in multilocal tests
Clonal test of the 600 clones
600 clones in FCBA & INRA clonal
banks
Seed Orchards : 1486 clones
Sélection on GCA
500 clones progeny tested
Clonal S.O.
Clonal S.O.
Genetic thinning
400 clones 200 clones
Within lines recombinationBreeding population
Seed collection within clonal banks
S.O. of tested families
S.O. of elite clones
European perspectives for a joined DF breeding activity
• Evaluation of existing trial networksManning commercial seed lotsIUFRO range wide provenance collectionINRA-NFV (Birot-Racz) Wa. provenancesUS 85 Wa. & Or. Progenies (EUDIREC)Weyerhaeuser & EU seed orchards (EUDIREC)
• Draw reaction norms for DF in Europe• Define seed transfer rules• Share expertise • Organize breeding• Organize evaluation of varieties
Thank you