Productivity, drought tolerance and pest status of hybrid Populus: Tree improvement and silvicultural implicatons

Biomass and Bioenergy

Volumn 14, Issue 1, 1998, Pages 1-20

  Robison, Daniel J ^a,b   Raffa, Kenneth F ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MADISON   (United States)

^b NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Biofuels; Biomass; Chrysomela; Cottonwood leaf beetle; Drought tolerance; Herbivory; Host plant resistance; Hybrid poplar; Populus; Septoria; Tree improvement

Indexed keywords

BIOMASS; CANKER; DISEASE RESISTANCE; DROUGHT TOLERANCE; HERBIVORE; HYBRID; MOUSE; PATHOGENICITY; PEST CONTROL; PHYSICAL TOLERANCE; PLANT GROWTH; PRODUCTIVITY; SILVICULTURE; SUSCEPTIBILITY;

CLONING; CROPS; CULTIVATION; DISEASES; DROUGHT; FUNGI;

BIOFUELS; DISEASE RESISTANCE; DROUGHT TOLERANCE; HERBIVORY; PEST SUSCEPTIBILITY; SILVICULTURE; SURVIVAL RATES;

BIOMASS;

BIOMASS DENSITY; DISEASE RESISTANCE; DROUGHT TOLERANCE; FOREST ECOSYSTEM; FUNGAL INFECTION; HYBRID POPLAR; HYBRID POPLARS; PEST RESISTANCE; POPLAR; PRODUCTIVITY; TREE PESTS;

CHRUSOMELA SCRIPTA; CHRYSOMELA SCRIPTA; CHRYSOMELIDAE; COLEOPTERA; MICROTUS PENNSYLAVANICUS; MICROTUS PENNSYLVANICUS; POPULUS; SEPTORIA MUSIVA;

EID: 0031949284     PISSN: 09619534     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0961-9534(97)00037-8     Document Type: Article

References (64)

1. NRC, Forestry Research: A Mandate for Change. National Research Council. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C. 84 pp. 1990.
2. Ranney, J. W., Wright, L. L. and Layton, P. A., Hardwood energy crops: the technology of intensive culture, J. For., 1987, 85, 17-29.
3. Jeffries, T. W., Physical, chemical and biochemical considerations in the biological degradation of wood. In Wood and Cellulosics: Industrial Utilization, Biotechnology, Structure and Properties, eds J. F. Kennedy, G. O. Phillips and P. A. Williams, pp. 213-230. Ellis Howard Ltd., West Sussex, U.K. 1987.
4. Klass, D. L., (ed.). Proc. Vols. I-III. First Biomass Conference of the Americas: Energy Environment, Agriculture, and Industry. Aug. 30-Sept. 2, 1993, Burlington, VT. National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, CO. NREL/CP-200-5768 DE930010050. 1942 pp. 1993.
5. Koning, J. W., Jr and Skog., K. E., Use of wood energy in the United States - an opportunity, Biomass, 1987, 12, 27-36.
6. Auclair, D. and Bouvarel, L., Intensive or extensive cultivation of short rotation hybrid poplar coppice on forest land, Bioresource Technol., 1992, 42, 53-59.
7. Dickmann, D. I. and Stuart, K. W. The Culture of Poplars in Eastern North America. Michigan State University, E. Lansing, MI. 168 pp. 1983.
8. National Biofuels Roundtable, Principles and Guidelines for the Development of Biomass Energy Systems, Draft Final Report. Electric Power Res. Inst., Palo Alto, CA. 30 pp. 1994.
9. OTA (Office of Technology Assessment - US Congress), Potential Environmental Impacts of Bioenergy Crop Production. US Govt Printing Office, Washington, D.C. Background Paper OTA-BP-E-118, 1993.
10. UNEP (United Nations Environment Programme), Green Energy, Biomass Fuels and the Environment. UN Publ., New York, NY, 1991.
11. Wilson, L. F., Some reforestation practices that increase insect pest buildup. In Insect Ecology -Paper Presented in the A.C. Hodson Lectures, eds H. M. Kulman and H. C. Chiang, Vol. 310, pp. 102-107. University of Minnesota Agric. Exp. Stn, Tech. Bull., 1977.
12. Schreiner, E. J., Production of Poplar Timber in Europe and its Significance and Application in the U.S. USDA For. Serv., Agric. Hdbk. No. 150. Washington, D.C. 124 pp. 1959.
13. Hansen, E., Moore, L., Netzer, D., Ostry, M., Phipps, H. and Zavitkovski, J., Establishing intensively cultured hybrid poplar plantations for fuel and fiber. USDA For. Serv., No-Central For. Exp. Stn., Gen. Tech. Rep. NC-78. 24 pp. 1983.
14. Weisgerber, H., Poplar breeding for the purpose of biomass production in short rotation periods in Germany - problems and first findings, For. Chron., 1993, 69, 727-729.
15. Ostry, M. E., Wilson L. F., McNabb, H. S. and Moore, L. M., A Guide to Insect, Disease, and Animal Pests of Poplars. USDA For. Serv., Agric. Hdbk. 677. Washington, D.C. 118 pp. 1989.
16. Kung, Ku-S., The Relative Susceptibility or Resistance to Damage by Insects of Poplar Clones Occurring in Wisconsin. M.S. Thesis, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI. 104 pp. 1957.
17. Caldbeck, E. S., McNabb, H. S. and Hart, E. R., Poplar clonal preferences of the cottonwood leaf beetle, J. Econ. Entomol., 1978, 71, 518-520.
18. Ostry, M. E. and McNabb, H. S., Susceptibility of Populus species and hybrids to disease in the north central United States, Plant Dis., 1985, 69, 755-757.
19. Abrahamson, L. P., White, E. H., Nowak, C. A., Briggs, R. D. and Robison, D. J., Evaluating hybrid poplar clonal potential in a three-year-old genetic selection trial, Biomass, 1990, 21, 101-114.
20. Robison, D. J. and Raffa, K. F., Characterization of hybrid poplar clones for resistance to the forest tent caterpillar, For. Sci., 1994, 40, 686-714.
21. Mitchell, M. J., Soil Survey of Columbia County, Wisconsin. USDA Soil Conservation Serv., Washington, D.C. 156 pp. 1978.
22. Trenberth, K. E., Branstator, G. W. and Arkin, P. A., Origins of the 1988 North American drought, Science, 1988, 242, 1640-1645.
23. Avery, T. E., Natural Resources Measurements, 2nd edn. McGraw-Hill Book Co., N.Y. 339 pp. 1975.
24. Abacus Concepts, SuperANOVA. Abacus Concepts Inc., Berkeley, CA. 322 pp. 1989.
25. Abacus Concepts, StatView II. Abacus Concepts Inc., Berkeley, CA. 234 pp. 1987.
26. Tuskan, G. A. and Rensema, T. R., Clonal differences in biomass characteristics, coppice ability, and biomass prediction equations among four Populus clones grown in eastern North Dakota, Can. J. For. Res., 1992, 22, 348-354.
27. Barkley, B. A., A silviculture guide for hybrid poplar in Ontario. Ont. Min. Nat. Res., Brockville, ONT, Canada. 35 pp. 1983.
28. Hansen, E. A., Irrigating short rotation intensive culture hybrid poplars, Biomass, 1988, 16, 237-250.
29. Liu, Z. J. and Dickmann, D. I., Responses of two hybrid Populus clones to flooding, drought, and nitrogen availability. 1. Morphology and growth, Can. J. Bot., 1992, 70, 2265-2270.
30. Strong, T. and Hansen, E. A., Response of three Populus species to drought. USDA For. Serv., No-Central For. Exp. Stn., Res. Paper NC-302. 9 pp. 1991.
31. Tschaplinski, T. J., Tuskan, G. A. and Gunderson, C. A., Water-stress tolerance of black and eastern cottonwood clones and four hybrid progeny. I. Growth, water relations, and gas exchange, Can. J. For. Res., 1994, 24, 364-371.
32. Heilman, P. E. and Stettler, R. F., Nutritional concerns in selection of black cottonwood and hybrid clones for short rotation, Can. J. For. Res., 1986, 16, 860-863.
33. Heilman, P. E. and Stettler, R. F., Genetic variation and productivity of Populus trichocarpa and its hybrids. IV. Performance in short-rotation coppice, Can. J. For. Res., 1990, 20, 1257-1264.
34. Stettler, R. F., Fenn, R. C., Heilman, P. E. and Stanton, B. J., Populus trichocarpa × Populus deltoides hybrids for short rotation culture: variation patterns and 4-year field performance, Can. J. For. Res., 1988, 18, 745-753.
35. Weber, J. C., Stettler, R. F. and Heilman, P. E., Genetic variation and productivity of Populus trichocarpa and its hybrids. I. Morphology and phenology of fifty native clones, Can. J. For. Res., 1985, 15, 384-388.
36. White, E. H., Whole-tree harvesting depletes soil nutrients, Can. J. For. Res., 1974, 4, 530-535.
37. Blackmon, B. G., Baker, J. B. and Cooper, D. T., Nutrient use by three geographic sources of eastern cottonwood, Can. J. For. Res., 1979, 9, 532-534.
38. Heilman, P. E. and Xie, F. G., Influence of nitrogen on growth and productivity of short-rotation Populus trichocarpa × Populus deltoides hybrids, Can. J. For. Res., 1993, 23, 1863-1869.
39. Mohrdiek, O., Discussion: future possibilities for poplar breeding, Can. J. For. Res., 1983, 13, 465-471.
40. Sastry, C. B. R. and Anderson, H. W., Clonal variation in gross heat of combustion of juvenile Populus hybrids, Can. J. For. Res., 1980, 10, 245-249.
41. Morin, M. J. and Demeritt, M. E. Jr., A nursery guide for propagating poplars. USDA For. Serv., NE For. Exp. Stn. Rep. NE-INF-56-84. 19 pp. 1984.
42. Wilson, L. F., Insect pests of Populus in the Lake States. In Proc. 16th Ann. Mtg. North American Poplar Council, 14-17 August 1978, ed. M. Morin, pp. 75-81. Thompsonville, MI. 1979.
43. Bingaman, B. R. and Hart, E. R., Feeding and ovi-position preferences of adult cottonwood leaf beetles (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) among Populus clones and leaf age classes, Environ. Entomol., 1992, 21, 508-517.
44. Robison, D. J. and Raffa, K. F., Hybrid poplar productivity and suitability for the forest tent caterpillar: a framework for evaluation. Proc. Aspen Symp. '89, 25-27 July 1989, Duluth, MN. USDA For. Serv., No-Central For. Exp. Stn., Gen. Tech. Rep. NC-140. pp. 155-162. 1990.
45. Witter, J. A. and Waisanen, L. A., The effect of differential flushing times among trembling aspen clones on tortricid caterpillar populations, Environ. Entomol., 1978, 7, 139-143.
46. Hodson, A. C., An ecological study of the forest tent caterpillar, Malacosoma disstria Hbn., in northern Minnesota. University of Minnesota, Agric. Exp. Stn., Tech. Bull. 148. 55 pp. 1941.
47. Robison, D. J. and Raffa, K. F., Effects of constitutive and inducible traits of hybrid poplars on forest tent caterpillar feeding and population ecology, For. Sci., 1997, 43, 252-267.
48. Dickmann, D. I., Marked differences among poplar clones in winter browsing damage by cottontail rabbits, Can. J. For. Res., 1978, 8, 351-354.
49. Netzer, D. A., Hybrid poplar plantations outgrow deer browsing effects. USDA For. Serv., No-Central For. Exp. Stn., Res. Note NC-325. 3 pp. 1984.
50. Augustin, S., Courtin, C. and Delplanque, A., Poplar clones effect on development, mortality, and fecundity of Chrysomela (= melasoma) populi 1 and Chrysomela tremulae F (Col, Chrysomelidae), Zeit. fur Ang. Entomol., 1993, 116, 39-49.
51. Bingaman, B. R. and Hart, E. R., Clonal and leaf age variation in Populus phenolic glycosides: implications for host selection by Chrysomela scripta (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae), Environ. Entomol., 1993, 22, 397-403.
52. Matsuda, K. and Matsuo, H., A flavanoid, luteolin-7-glucoside, as well as salicin and populin, stimulating the feeding of leaf beetles attacking salicaceous plants, Appl. Entomol. Zool., 1985, 20, 305-313.
53. Smiley, J. T., Horn, J. M. and Rank, N. E., Ecological effects of salicin at three trophic levels: new problems from old adaptations, Science, 1985, 229, 649-651.
54. Palo, R. T., Distribution of birch (Betula spp.), willow (Salix spp.), and poplar (Populus spp.) secondary metabolites and their potential role as chemical defense against herbivores, J. Chem. Ecol., 1984, 10, 499-520.
55. Tahvanainen, J., Helle, E., Julkunen-Tiitto, R. and Lavola, A., Phenolic compounds of willow bark as deterrents against feeding by mountain hare, Oecologia (Berlin), 1985, 65, 319-323.
56. Bryant, J. P., Clausen, T. P., Reichardt, P. B., McCarthy, M. C. and Werner, R. A., Effect of nitrogen fertilization upon the secondary chemistry and nutritional value of quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides Michx.) leaves for the large aspen tortrix (Choristoneura conflictana (Walker)), Oecologia (Berlin), 1987, 73, 513-517.
57. Lindroth, R. L. and Hemming, J. D. C., Responses of the gypsy moth (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae) to tremulacin, an aspen phenolic glycoside, Environ. Entomol., 1990, 19, 842-847.
58. Davis, J. M., Clarke, H. R. G., Bradshaw, H. D., Jr and Gordon., M. P., Populus chitinase genes: structure, organization, and similarity of translated sequences to herbaceous plant chitinases, Plant Mol. Biol., 1992, 17, 631-639.
59. Coley, P. D., Bryant, J. P. and Chapin III, F. S., Resource availability and plant anti-herbivore defense, Science, 1985, 230, 895-899.
60. P. Feeny, Plant apparency and chemical defense. In Biochemical Interactions Between Plants and Insects, eds J. W. Wallace and R. L. Mansell, Vol. 10, pp. 1-40. Rec. Adv. Phytochem. 1976.
61. Mattson, W. J., Lawrence, R. K., Haack, R. A., Herms, D. A. and Charles, P.-J., Defensive strategies of woody plants against different insect-feeding guilds in relation to plant ecological strategies and intimacy of association with insects. In Mechanisms of Woody Plant Defense Against Insects, eds W. J. Mattson et al., pp. 3-38. Springer-Verlag, NY. 1988.
62. Demeritt, M. E. Jr, Six-year results of hybrid poplar clonal tests in Pennsylvania and Maryland. In Proc. 28th NE Forest Tree Improvement Conf., 7-9 July, 1982, Durham, NH. ed. R. T. Eckert, University of New Hampshire, Inst. Nat. and Environ. Res., pp. 102-109, 1983.
63. Rasmusson, D. C., Ideotype research and plant breeding. In 16th Stadler Genetics Symp., University of Missouri Agric. Exp. Stn., Columbia, MO. pp. 95-119, 1984.
64. Robison, D. J., Mccown, B. H. and Raffa, K. F., Responses of gypsy moth (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae) and forest tent caterpillar (Lepidoptera: Lasiocampidae) to transgenic poplar, Populus spp., containing a Bacillus thuringiensis d-endotoxin gene, Environ. Entomol., 1994, 23, 1030-1041.