The impact of spatial heterogeneity on selection: A case study on Pinus pinaster breeding seedling orchards

Canadian Journal of Forest Research

Volumn 38, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 114-124

  Zas, Rafael ^a,b  

^a Centro de Investigaciones Ambientales de Lourizan   (Spain)

^b Ensis   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AUTOCORRELATION; CROPS; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; SEED;

HEIGHT GROWTH; MICROSITES; SPATIAL DISTRIBUTION; TRIALS;

FORESTRY;

AUTOCORRELATION; CONIFEROUS TREE; HEIGHT; HETEROGENEITY; ORCHARD; SPATIAL DISTRIBUTION;

BREEDING; SEEDLING ORCHARDS;

PINUS PINASTER;

EID: 39649111055     PISSN: 00455067     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1139/X07-099     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Barnes, R.D. 1995. The breeding seedling orchard in multiple population breeding strategy. Silvae Genet. 44: 81-88.
2. Birkhofer, K., Henschel, J., and Scheu, S. 2006. Spatial-pattern analysis in a territorial spider: evidence for multi-scale effects. Ecography, 29: 641-648. doi:10.1111/j.0906-7590.2006.04661.x.
3. Burczyk, J., and Prat, D. 1997. Male reproductive success in Pseudotsuga menziesii (Mirb.) Franco: the effects of spatial structure and flowering characteristics. Heredity, 79: 638-647. doi:10.1038/sj.hdy.6882600.
4. Burdon, R.D., and Shelbourne, C.J.A. 1971. Breeding populations for recurrent selection: conflicts and possible solutions. N.Z. J. For. Sci. 1: 174-193.
5. Butcher, T.B., and Hopkins, E.R. 1993. Realised gains from breeding Pinus pinaster. For. Ecol. Manage. 58: 211-231. doi:10.1016/0378-1127(93)90146-E.
6. Costa e Silva, J., Dutkowski, G.W., and Gilmour, A.R. 2001. Analysis of early tree height in forest genetic trials is enhanced by including a spatially correlated residual. Can. J. For. Res. 31: 1887-1893. doi:10.1139/x01-123.
7. David, A., Pike, C., and Stine, R. 2003. Comparison of selection methods for optimizing genetic gain and gene diversity in a red pine (Pinus resinosa Ait.) seedling seed orchard. Theor. Appl. Genet. 107: 843-849. doi:10.1007/s00122-003-1330-0.
8. Dutkowski, G.W., Costa e Silva, J., Gilmour, A.R., and Lopez, G.A. 2002. Spatial analysis methods for forest genetic trials. Can. J. For. Res. 32: 2201-2214. doi:10.1139/x02-111.
9. Dutkowski, G.W., Costa e Silva, J., Gilmour, A.R., Wallendorf, H., and Aguiar, A. 2006. Spatial analysis enhances modelling of a wide variety of traits in forest genetic trials. Can. J. For. Res. 36: 1851-1870. doi:10.1139/X06-059.
10. Falconer, D.S., and Mackay, T.F.C. 2001. Introducción a la genética cuantitativa. 4th ed. Editorial Acribia S.A., Zaragoza, Spain.
11. Fedorkov, A., Lindgren, D., and David, A. 2005. Genetic gain and gene diversity following thinning in a half-sib plantation. Silvae Genet. 54: 185-189.
12. Fu, Y., Yanchuk, A.D., and Namkoong, G. 1999. Spatial patterns of tree height variations in a series of Douglas-fir progeny trials: implications for genetic testing. Can. J. For. Res. 29: 714-723. doi:10.1139/x99-046.
13. Gezan, S.A., White, T.L., and Huber, D.A. 2006. Comparison of experimental designs for clonal forestry using simulated data. For. Sci. 52: 108-116.
14. Hamann, A., Namkoong, G., and Koshy, M.P. 2002. Improving precision of breeding values by removing spatially autocorrelated variation in forestry field experiments. Silvae Genet. 51: 210-215.
15. Hansen, J.K., Wellendorf, H., and Kjaer, E.D. 2005. Low cost improvement of coastal Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii var. menziesii (Mirb.) Franco) by application of the breeding seed orchard approach in Denmark. Silvae Genet. 54: 218-227.
16. Kang, K.S., Lindgren, D., and Mullin, T.J. 2001. Prediction of genetic gain and gene diversity in seed orchard crops under alternative management strategies. Theor. Appl. Genet. 103: 1099-1107. doi:10.1007/ s001220100700.
17. Kang, K.S., El-Kassaby, Y.A., Han, S.U., and Kim, C.S. 2005. Genetic gain and diversity under different thinning scenarios in a breeding seed orchard of Quercus accutissima. For. Ecol. Manage. 212: 405-410. doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2005.03.063.
18. Legendre, P. 1993. Spatial autocorrelation: a trouble or new paradigm? Ecology, 74: 1659-1673. doi:10.2307/1939924.
19. Littell, R.C., Milliken, G.A., Stroup, W.W., and Wolfinger, R.D. 1996. SAS System for mixed models. SAS Institute Inc. Cary, N.C.
20. Maestre, F., Escudero, A., Martinez, I., Guerreros, C., and Rubio, A. 2005. Does spatial pattern matter to ecosystem functioning? Insights from biological soil crusts. Funct. Ecol. 19: 566-573. doi:10.1111/j.1365- 2435.2005.01000.x.
21. Olsson, T., Lindgren, D., and Li, B. 2001. Balancing genetic gain and relatedness in seed orchards. Silvae Genet. 50: 222-227.
22. Perry, G.L.W., Miller, B.P., and Enright, N.J. 2006. A comparison of methods for the statistical analysis of spatial point patterns in plant ecology. Plant Ecol. 187: 59-82. doi:10.1007/s11258-006-9133-4.
23. Perry, J.N. 1995. Spatial analysis by distance indices. J. Anim. Ecol. 64: 303-314. doi:10.2307/5892.
24. Rossi, R.E., Mulla, D.J., Journel, A.G., and Franz, E.H. 1992. Geoestatistical tools for modeling and interpreting ecological spatial dependence. Ecol. Monogr. 62: 277-314. doi:10.2307/2937096.
25. Rozas, V., and Camarero, J.J. 2005. Técnicas de análisis espacial de patrones de puntos aplicadas en ecología forestal. Invest. Agrar. Sist. Recur. For. 14: 79-97.
26. Saenz-Romero, C., Nordheim, E.V., Guries, R.P., and Crump, P.M. 2001. A case study of a provenance/progeny test using trend analysis with correlated errors and SAS PROC MIXED. Silvae Genet. 50: 127-135.
27. SAS Institute Inc. 1999. SAS/STAT user's guide. Version 8. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, N.C.
28. Wright, J.W. 1976. Introduction to forest genetics. Academic Press, New York.
29. Zas, R. 2006. Iterative kriging for removing spatial autocorrelation in analysis of forest genetic trials. Tree Genet. Genomes, 2: 177-186. doi:10.1007/s11295-006-0042-4.
30. Zas, R., Merlo, E., and Fernández-López, J. 2004. Genetic parameter estimates for maritime pine in the Atlantic coast of North-west Spain. For. Genet. 11: 45-53.