The impact of differential success of somatic embryogenesis on the outcome of clonal forestry programs. I. Initial comparison under multitrait selection

Canadian Journal of Forest Research

Volumn 36, Issue 6, 2006, Pages 1376-1384

  Lstibůrek, Milan ^a,c   Mullin, T J ^a,d   El Kassaby, Yousry A ^b  

^a NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

^c CZECH UNIVERSITY OF LIFE SCIENCES PRAGUE   (Czech Republic)

^d BioSylve Forest Science NZ Limited   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CELLS; GENETIC ENGINEERING;

ECONOMIC IMPORTANCE; MULTITRAIT SELECTION; OFFSPRING GENOTYPES; SOMATIC EMBRYOS;

FORESTRY;

CLONE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; GENETIC VARIATION; GENOTYPE; PLANT BREEDING; POPULATION SIZE;

BIOLOGICAL POPULATIONS; FORESTRY; GENOTYPES; HERITABILITY; SIMULATION; SOMATIC EMBRYOGENESIS;

EID: 33748565679     PISSN: 00455067     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1139/X06-036     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Bulmer, M.G. 1985. The mathematical theory of quantitative genetics. Clarendon Press, Oxford.
2. Casella, G., and Berger, R.L. 2002. Statistical inference. 2nd ed. Duxbury, Pacific Grove, Calif.
3. Chalupa, V. 1985. Somatic embryogenesis and plantlet regeneration from cultured immature and mature embryos of Picea abies (L.) Karst. Commun. Inst. For. Cech. 14: 57-63.
4. Cyr, D.R., and Klimaszewska, K. 2002. Conifer somatic embryogenesis: II. Applications. Dendrobiology, 48: 41-49.
5. Danell, Ö. 1995. Breeding programs in Sweden. 1. General approach. SkogForsk Arbetsrapport 302. pp. 1-4.
6. del-Bosque González, A.S. 1989. Simulations of nucleus breeding schemes for wool production. Ph.D. dissertation, University of New England, Armidale, New South Wales, Australia.
7. Falconer, D.S., and Mackay, T.F.C. 1996. Introduction to quantitative genetics. 4th ed. Longman Group Ltd., Harlow, UK.
8. Gentle, J.E. 1998. Cholesky factorization. In Numerical linear algebra for applications in statistics. Springer-Verlag, Berlin. pp. 93-95.
9. Hakman, I., Fowke, L.C., von Arnold, S., and Eriksson, T. 1985. The development of somatic embryogenesis in tissue cultures initiated from immature embryos of Picea abies (Norway spruce). Plant Sci. 38: 53-59.
10. Harris, D.L. 1964. Expected and predicted progress from index selection involving estimates of population parameters. Biometrics, 20: 46-72.
11. Harville, D.A. 1975. Index selection with proportionality constraints. Biometrics, 31: 223-225.
12. Klimaszewska, K., and Cyr, D.R. 2002. Conifer somatic embryogenesis: I. Development. Dendrobiology, 48: 31-39.
13. Lindgren, D., and Mullin, T.J. 1997. Balancing gain and relatedness in selection. Silvae Genet. 46: 124-129.
14. Lindgren, D., Gea, L.D., and Jefferson, P.A. 1996. Loss of genetic diversity monitored by status number. Silvae Genet. 45: 52-59.
15. L'Ecuyer, P., Simard, R., Chen, E.J., and Kelton, W.D. 2002. An objected-oriented random-number package with many long streams and substreams. Oper. Res. 50: 1073-1075.
16. MacKay, J., Becwar, M., Park, Y.-S., Perfetti, C., Cordero, J., Pullman, G., and Lockart La'C. 2001. Genetics of somatic embryogenesis in loblolly pine. In Proceedings of the 26th Southern Forest Tree Improvement Conference, Athens, Ga., 26-29 June 2001. Edited by J.F.D. Dean. Southern Forest Tree Improvement Committee, Athens, Ga. Publ. 48. pp. 40-47.
17. McKeand, S.E.. and Bridgwater, F. 1998. A strategy for the third breeding cycle of loblolly pine in the southeastern U.S. Silvae Genet. 47: 223-234.
18. Merkle, S.A., and Dean, J.F.D. 2000. Forest tree biotechnology. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 11: 298-302.
19. Mikola, J. 2002. Long-term tree breeding strategy in Finland: integration of seed production and breeding. In Proceedings of the Nordic Group for Management of Genetic Resources of Trees, Mekrijärvi, Finland, 23-27 March 2001. Edited by M. Haapanen and J. Mikola. Metsäntutkimuslaitoksen tiedonantoja 842. pp. 12-13.
20. Mullin, T.J., and Park, Y.S. 1995. Stochastic simulation of population management strategies for tree breeding: a new decision-support tool for personal computers. Silvae Genet. 44: 132-141.
21. Nagmani, R., and Bonga, J.M. 1985. Embryogenesis in subcultured callus of Larix decidua. Can. J. For. Res. 15: 1088-1091.
22. Niskanen, A.M., Lu, J., Seitz, S., Keinonen, K., Von Weissenberg, K., and Pappinen, A. 2004. Effect of parent genotype on somatic embryogenesis in Scots pine (Pinus xylvestris). Tree Physiol. 24: 1259-1265.
23. Park, Y.S. 2002. Implementation of conifer somatic embryogenesis in clonal forestry: technical requirements and deployment considerations. Ann. For. Sci. 59: 651-656.
24. Park, Y.S., Pond, S.E., and Bonga, J.M. 1993. Initiation of somatic embryogenesis in white spruce (Picea glauca): genetic control, culture treatment effects, and implications for tree breeding. Theor. Appl. Genet. 86: 427-436.
25. Pesek, J., and Baker, R.J. 1969. Desired improvement in relation to selection indices. Can. J. Plant Sci. 49: 803-804.
26. Press, W.H., Teukolsky, S.A., Vetterling, W.T., and Flannery, B.P. 1992. Numerical recipes in FORTRAN. The art of scientific computing. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
27. Sutton, B. 2002. Commercial delivery of genetic improvement to conifer plantations using somatic embryogenesis. Ann. For. Sci. 59: 657-661.
28. Timmis, R. 1998. Bioprocessing for tree production in the forest industry: conifer somatic embryogenesis. Biotechnol. Prog. 14: 156-166.