Genealogical relationship among members of selection and production populations of yellow cedar (callitropsis nootkatensis [D. Don] Oerst.) in the absence of parental information

Journal of Heredity

Volumn 101, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 154-163

  Massah, Nasim ^a   Wang, Jinliang ^b   Russell, John H ^c   Van Niejenhuis, Annette ^d   El Kassaby, Yousry A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

^b INSTITUTE OF ZOOLOGY   (United Kingdom)

^c Box 335   (Canada)

^d Western Forest Products Inc   (Canada)

Author keywords

Callitropsis nootkatensis; Clonal testing; DNA fingerprinting; Pairwise relative kinship; Pedigree reconstruction; Selection

Indexed keywords

DNA;

ARTICLE; CROP; DNA FINGERPRINTING; GENE LOCUS; GENETIC VARIABILITY; GENOTYPE; NONHUMAN; PEDIGREE; PHENOTYPE; PHYLOGENY; PLANT SEED; POPULATION GENETICS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REFORESTATION; SEEDLING; TREE;

BREEDING; BRITISH COLUMBIA; CHAMAECYPARIS; CROPS, AGRICULTURAL; CROSSES, GENETIC; DNA FINGERPRINTING; DNA, PLANT; GENETICS, POPULATION; GENOTYPE; GERM CELLS, PLANT; PHYLOGENY; SELECTION, GENETIC; SEQUENCE ANALYSIS, DNA; TREES;

CALLITROPSIS NOOTKATENSIS;

EID: 77249131219     PISSN: 00221503     EISSN: 14657333     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/jhered/esp102     Document Type: Article

References (64)

1. Allard RW. 1960. Principles of plant breeding. New York: John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2. Barton GM. 1976. A review of yellow cedar (Chamaecyparis nootkatensis [D. DON] SPACH) extractives and their importance to utilization. Wood Fiber. 8:172-176.
3. Bergel RA, Vigilant L. 2007. Genetic analysis reveals population structure and recent migration within the highly fragmented range of the cross river gorilla (Gorilla gorilla). Mol Ecol. 16:501-516.
4. Bérubé Y, Ritland C, Ritland K. 2003. Isolation, characterization, and crossspecies utility of microsatellites in yellow cedar (Chamaecyparis nootkatensis). Genome. 46:353-361.
5. Bishir J, Namkoong G. 1987. Unsound seed in conifers: estimation of numbers of lethal allele and magnitude of effect associated with maternal parent. Silvae Genet. 36:180-185.
6. Bishir J, Pepper WD. 1977. Estimation of the number of embryonic lethal alleles in conifers: I. Self-pollinated seed. Silvae Genet. 26:50-54.
7. Bradbury IR, Campana SE, Bentzen P. 2008. Estimating contemporary early life-history dispersal in an estuarine fish: integrating molecular and otolith elemental approaches. Mol Ecol. 17:1438-1450.
8. Bramlett DL, Popham TW. 1971. Model relating unsound seed and embryonic lethals in self-pollinated pines. Silvae Genet. 20:192-193.
9. Camus-Kulandaivelu L, Veyrieras J-B, Gouesnard B, Charcosset A, Manicacci D. 2007. Evaluating the reliability of STRUCTURE outputs in case of relatedness between individuals. Crop Sci. 47:887-892.
10. Cockerham C. 1967. Group inbreeding and coancestry. Genetics. 56:89-104.
11. Cyr DR, Attree SM, El-Kassaby YA, Ellis DD, Polonenko DR, Sutton BCS. 2001. Application of somatic embryogenesis to tree improvement in conifers. In: Morohoshi N, Komamine A, editors. Molecular breeding of woody plants. Elsevier Science B.V. p. 305-312.
12. Doyle JJ, Doyle JL. 1987. A rapid DNA isolation procedure from small quantities of fresh leaf tissues. Phytochem Bull. 19:11-15.
13. El-Kassaby Y, Lstibu°rek M. 2009. Forthcoming. 2009. Breeding without breeding. Genet Res. 91:111-120.
14. El-Kassaby YA. 1995. The fitness of reproductive plasticity in yellow-cedar (Chaemacyparis nootkatensis). Silvae Genet. 44:217-218.
15. El-Kassaby YA. 2000. Representation of Douglas-fir and western hemlock families in seedling crops as affected by seed biology and nursery crop management practices. For Genet. 7:305-315.
16. El-Kassaby YA, Maze J, Macleod DA, Banerjee S. 1991. Reproductive cycle plasticity in yellow-cedar (Chamaecyparis nootkatensis). Can J For Res. 21: 1360-1364.
17. El-Kassaby YA, Thomson AJ. 1995. Effect of seed biology and common seedling nursery production practices on parental contribution rank and relative performance. For Sci. 42:228-235.
18. Evanno G, Regnaut G, Goudet J. 2005. Detecting the number of clusters of individuals using the software STRUCTUTRE: a simulation study. Mol Ecol. 14:2611-2620.
19. Falconer DS, Mackay TFC. 1996. Introduction to quantitative genetics. 4th ed. New York: Longman.
20. Farjon A, Nguyen TH, Harder DK, Phan KL, Averyanov L. 2002. A new genus and species in Cupressaceae (Coniferales) from Northern Vietnam, Xanthocyparis vietnamensis. Novon. 12:179-189.
21. Gadek PA, Alpers DL, Heslewood MM, Quinn CJ. 2000. Relationships within Cupressaceae sensu lato: a combined morphological and molecular approach. Am J Bot. 87:1044-1057.
22. Grattapaglia D, Ribeiro VJ, Rezende GDSP. 2004. Retrospective selection of elite parent trees using paternity testing with microsatellite markers: an alternative short term breeding tactic for Eucalyptus. Theor Appl Genet. 109:192-199.
23. Harris AS. 1990. Alaska-cedar. Silvics of North America: 1. Conifers. Agriculture Handbook 654. Washington (DC): USDA Forest Service.
24. Heilman PE. 1999. Planted forests: poplars. New For. 17:89-93.
25. Karlsson IK, Russell JH. 1990. Comparison of yellow cypress trees of seedling and rooted cutting origins after 9 and 11 years in the field. Can J For Res. 29:37-42.
26. Koski V. 1971. Embryonic lethals of Picea abies and Pinus sylvestris. Commun Inst For Fenn. 75:1-30.
27. Koski V. 1973. On self-pollination, genetic load and subsequent inbreeding in some conifers. Commun Inst For Fenn. 78:1-42.
28. Lambeth C, Lee BC, O'Malley D, Wheeler N. 2001. Polymix breeding with parental analysis of progeny: an alternative to full-sib breeding and testing. Theor Appl Genet. 103:930-943.
29. Liewlaksaneeyanawin C. 2006. Genetic evaluation of natural and domesticated lodgepole pine populations using molecular markers. PhD thesis. Vancouver (BC): The University of British Columbia.
30. Lindgren D, Gea LD, Jefferson PA. 1996. Loss of genetic diversity monitored by status number. Silvae Genet. 45:52-59.
31. Little DP, Schwarzbach AE, Adams RP, Hsieh C. 2004. The circumscription and phylogenetic relationships of Callitropsis and the newly described genus Xanthocyparis (Cupressaceae). Am J Bot. 91:1872-1881.
32. Matsumoto A, Tani N, Li X, Nakao Y, Tomaru N, Tsumura Y. 2006. Development and polymorphisms of microsatellite markers for hinoki (Chamaecyparis obtusa). Mol Ecol Notes. 6:310-312.
33. Nakao Y, Iwata H, Matsumoto A, Tsmura Y, Tomaru N. 2001. Highly polymorphic microsatellite markers in Chamaecyparis obtusa. Can J For Res. 31:2248-2251.
34. Namkoong G. 1979. Introduction to quantitative genetics in forestry. Washington (DC): US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. Tech Bulletin No 1588.
35. Namkoong G, Bishir J. 1987. Frequency of lethal alleles in forest tree populations. Evolution. 41:1123-1127.
36. Namkoong G, Kang HC, Brouard JS. 1988. Tree breeding: principles and strategies. New York: Springer-Verlag Monograph, Theo Appl Genet 11.
37. O'Connell LM. 2003. The evolution of inbreeding in western redcedar (Thuja plicata: Cupressaceae). PhD thesis. Vancouver (BC): The University of British Columbia.
38. O'Connell LM, Viard F, Russell J, Ritland K. 2001. The mating system in natural populations of western redcedar (Thuja plicata). Can J Bot. 79: 753-756.
39. Owens JN, Molder M. 1974. Cone initiation and development before dormancy in yellow cedar (Chamaecyparis nootkatensis). Can J Bot. 52:2075-2084.
40. Owens JN, Molder M. 1975. Pollination, female gametophyte, and embryo and seed development in yellow cedar (Chamaecyparis nootkatensis). Can J Bot. 53:186-199.
41. Owens JN, Molder M. 1977. Cone induction in yellow cypress (Chamaecyparis nootkatensis) by gibberellin A3 and the subsequent development of seeds within the induced cones. Can J For Res. 7:605-613.
42. Pawuk WH. 1993. Germination of Alaska-cedar seed. Tree Planter's Notes. 44:21-24.
43. Pritchard JK, Stephens M, Donnelly P. 2000. Inference of population structure using multilocus genotype data. Genetics. 155:945-959.
44. Pritchard JK, Wen W. 2004. Documentation for structure software. Chicago (IL): The University of Chicago Press.
45. Pritchard JK, Wen X, Falush D. 2007. Documentation for structure software Version 2.2. http://pritch.bsd.uchicago.edu/software/structure2-2. html.
46. Ritland C, Pape T, Ritland K. 2001. Genetic structure of yellow cedar (Chamaecyparis nootkatensis). Can J Bot. 79:822-828.
47. Ritland K. 1996. Estimators for pairwise relatedness and individual inbreeding coefficients. Genet Res. 67:175-185.
48. Robinson AJ, Love CG, Batley J, Barker G, Edwards D. 2004. Simple sequence repeat marker loci discovery using SSR primer. Bioinformatics. 20:1475-1476.
49. Russell JH, Cartwright C. 1991. The genetics of yellow cypress. In: Lousier JD, editor. Yellow cypress: Can we grow it? Can we sell it? Victoria (BC): Forestry Canada and British Columbia Ministry of Forests. FRDA Report 171. p. 34-35.
50. Russell JH, Grossnickle SC, Ferguson C, Carson DW. 1990. Yellow cedar stecklings: nursery production and field performance. Victoria (BC): Forestry Canada and British Columbia Ministry of Forests. FRDA Report 148.
51. Savolainen O, Karkkainen K, Kuttinen H. 1992. Estimating numbers of embryonic lethals in conifers. Heredity. 69:308-314.
52. Sorensen F. 1969. Embryonic lethals in Douglas-fir, Pseudotsuga menziesii. Am Nat. 103:389-398.
53. Sorensen FC. 1982. The roles of polyembryony and embryo viability in the genetic system of conifers. Evolution. 36:725-733.
54. SPAR: BC Ministry of Forests and Range. 2009. Seed planning and registry application. http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/hti/spar/index.htm
55. Sutton BCS, Attree SM, El-Kassaby YA, Grossnickle SC, Polonenko DR. 2004. Commercialisation of somatic embryogenesis for plantation forestry. In: Walter C, Carson M, editors. Plantation forest biotechnology for the 21st century. Kerala (India): Research Signpost. p. 275-301.
56. Thompson SL, Bérubé Y, Bruneau A, Ritland K. 2008. Three-gene identity coefficients demonstrate that clonal reproduction promotes inbreeding and spatial relatedness in yellow-cedar (Callitropsis nootkatensis). Evolution. 62:2570-2579.
57. Vähä J-P, Erkinaro J, Niemelä E, Primmer CR. 2007. Life-history and habitat features influence the within-river genetic structure of Atlantic salmon. Mol Ecol. 16:2638-2654.
58. Wang J. 2004. Sibship reconstruction from genetic data with typing errors. Genetics. 166:1963-1979.
59. Wang WP, Hwang CY, Lin TP, Hwang SY. 2003. Historical biogeography and phylogenetic relationships of the genus chamaecyparis (Cupressaceae) inferred from chloroplast DNA polymorphism. Plant Syst Evol. 241:13-28.
60. Williams CG, Barnes RD, Nyoka I. 1999. Embryonic genetic load for a neotropical conifer, Pinus patula Schiede et Deppe. J Hered. 90:394-398.
61. Williams CG, Savolainen O. 1996. Inbreeding depression in conifers: implications for breeding strategy. For Sci. 42:102-117.
62. Wright S. 1965. The interpretation of population structure by F-statistics with special regard to systems of mating. Evolution. 19:395-420.
63. Xiang B, Li B, McKeand S. 2003. Genetic gain and selection efficiency of loblolly pine in three geographic regions. For Sci. 49:196-208.
64. Yu J, Pressoir G, Briggs H, William HB, Bi IV, Yamasaki M, Doebley JF, McMullen MD, Gaut BS, Nielsen DM, et al. 2006. A unified mixed-model method for association mapping that accounts for multiple levels of relatedness. Nat Genet. 38:203-208.