The genetic and economic gains from forest tree breeding programmes in Scandinavia and Finland

Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research

Volumn 32, Issue 4, 2017, Pages 273-286

  Jansson, Gunnar ^a   Hansen, Jon Kehlet ^b   Haapanen, Matti ^c   Kvaalen, Harald ^d   Steffenrem, Arne ^d  

^a THE FORESTRY RESEARCH INSTITUTE OF SWEDEN   (Sweden)

^b UNIVERSITY OF COPENHAGEN   (Denmark)

^c FINNISH FOREST RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Finland)

^d NORWEGIAN INSTITUTE OF BIOECONOMY RESEARCH   (Norway)

Author keywords

economic benefit; economic gain; genetic gain; Genetic improvement; productivity; seed orchard; tree breeding

Indexed keywords

ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL EFFECTS; PRODUCTIVITY; PROFITABILITY;

ECONOMIC BENEFITS; ECONOMIC GAINS; GENETIC GAIN; GENETIC IMPROVEMENTS; SEED ORCHARD; TREE BREEDING;

FORESTRY;

EID: 84992065353     PISSN: 02827581     EISSN: 16511891     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/02827581.2016.1242770     Document Type: Review

References (128)

1. Abitbol T, Rivkin A, Cao Y, Nevo Y, Abraham E, Ben-Shalom T, Lapidot S, Shoseyov O., 2016. Nanocellulose, a tiny fiber with huge applications. Cur Opin Biotech. 39:76–88. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.copbio.2016.01.002. doi:10.1016/j.copbio.2016.01.002
2. Ahtikoski A., 2000. The profitability of Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) and Silver birch (Betula pendula Roth) next generation seed orchards in Finland [PhD dissertation]. University of Helsinki, Department of Forest Economics, Helsinki. pp. 148, ISBN 951-45-9459-2.
3. Ahtikoski A, Ojansuu R, Haapanen M, Hynynen J, Kärkkäinen K. 2012. Financial performance of using genetically improved regeneration material of Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) in Finland. New Forest. 43:335–348. doi:10.1007/s11056-011-9284-6
4. Ahtikoski A, Pulkkinen P. 2003. Cost-benefit analysis of using orchard or stand seed in Scots pine sowing, the case of northern Finland. New Forest. 26:247–262. doi:10.1023/A:1024423719864
5. Ahtikoski A, Salminen H, Ojansuu R, Hynynen J, Kärkkäinen K, Haapanen M. 2013. Optimizing stand management involving the effect of genetic gain:preliminary results for Scots pine in Finland. Can J For Res. 43:299–305. doi:10.1139/cjfr-2012-0393
6. Andersson B, Elfving B, Ericsson T, Persson T, Gregorsson B. 2003. Performance of improved Pinus sylvestris in Northern Sweden. Scand J For Res. 18:199–206. doi:10.1080/02827581.2003.9728290
7. Andersson B, Elfving B, Persson T, Ericsson T, Kroon J. 2007. Characteristics and development of improved Pinus sylvestris in northern Sweden. Can J For Res. 37:84–92. doi:10.1139/x06-224
8. Beauregard RL, Gazo R, Ball RD. 2002. Grade recovery, value, and return-to-log for the production of NZ Visual grades (Cuttings and Framing) and Australian Machine Stress Grades. Wood Fiber Sci. 34:485–502.
9. Bergh J, Nilsson U, Kjartansson B, Karlsson M. 2010. Impact of climate change on the productivity of Silver birch, Norway spruce and Scots pine stands in Sweden with economic implications for timber production. Ecol Bull. 53:185–195.
10. Berlin M, Danell Ö, Jansson G, Andersson B, Elfving B, Ericsson T. 2009. A model to estimate economic weight of tree survival relative to volume production taking patchiness into account. Scand J For Res. 24:278–287. doi:10.1080/02827580903117388
11. Berlin M, Jansson G, Lönnstedt L, Danell Ö, Ericsson T. 2012. Development of economic forest tree breeding objectives:review of existing methodology and discussion of its application in Swedish conditions. Scand J For Res. 27:681–691. doi:10.1080/02827581.2012.672586
12. Berlin M, Persson T, Jansson G, Haapanen M, Ruotsalainen S, Bärring L, Andersson Gull B. 2016. Scots pine transfer effect models for growth and survival in Sweden and Finland. Silva Fennica 50 article id 1562. http://dx.doi.org/10.14214/sf.1562.
13. Bjørnstad Å. 1981. Fotopoeriodiske etter-effektar av foreldremiljøet i 1/0-plantar av gran (Picea abies (L.) Karst.) [Photoperiodical after-effects of parent plant environment in Norway spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karst.) seedlings]. Medd Nor Inst Skogforsk. 36:1–30. (Norwegian).
14. Bosselmann AS, Jacobsen JB, Kjær ED, Thorsen BJ. 2008. Climate change, uncertainty and the economic value of genetic diversity:A pilot study on methodologies. Forest & Landscape Working Papers No. 31-2008, 58 pp. Forest & Landscape, Hørsholm, Denmark.
15. Bridgewater FE. 1984. The impact of genetic improvement of stem straightness on yield and value of lumber. Paper presented at:Proceedings of the Symposium on Utilization of the Changing Wood Resource in the Southern United States. June 12–14, 1984. North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina, USA.
16. Butcher TB, Hopkins ER. 1993. Realised gains from breeding Pinus pinaster. For Ecol Manage. 58:211–231. doi:10.1016/0378-1127(93)90146-E
17. Carson SD, Garcia O, Hayes JD. 1999. Realized gain and prediction of yield with genetically improved Pinus radiata in New Zealand. Forest Sci. 45:186–200.
18. Chen ZQ, Karlsson B, Lundqvist SO, García Gil MR, Olsson L, Wu HX. 2015. Estimating solid wood properties using Pilodyn and acoustic velocity on standing trees of Norway spruce. Ann For Sci. 72:499–508. doi:10.1007/s13595-015-0458-9
19. Costa e Silva J, Wellendorf H, Borralho NMG. 2000. Prediction of breeding values and expected genetic gains in diameter growth, wood density and spiral grain from parental selection in Picea abies. Silvea Genet. 49:02–109.
20. Dale VH, Joyce LA, McNulty S, Neilson RP, Ayres MP, Flannigan MD, Hanson PJ, Irland LC, Lugo AE, Peterson CJ, et al. 2001. Climate change and forest disturbances. BioScience. 51:723–734. doi:10.1641/0006-3568(2001)051[0723:CCAFD]2.0.CO;2
21. Danborg F. 1996. Density variations and demarcation of the juvenile wood in Norway Spruce (Forskningsserien nr. 10-1994). Hørsholm:Danish Forest and Landscape Research Institute.
22. Danell Ö. 1991. Survey of past, current and future Swedish forest tree breeding. Silva Fennica. 25:241–247. doi:10.14214/sf.a15621
23. Doherty WOS, Mousavioun P, Fellows CM. 2011. Value-adding to cellulosic ethanol:lignin polymers. Ind Crop Prod. 33:259–276. doi:10.1016/j.indcrop.2010.10.022
24. Edvardsen OM, Steffenrem A, Johnskås OR, Johnsen Ø, Myking T, Kvaalen H. 2010. Strategi for skogplanteforedling 2010-2040 (høringsutkast). [Strategy for tree breeding 2010-2040 (proposal).] Stiftelsen Det norske Skogfrøverk/The Norwegian Forest Seed Center, Hamar, Norway, p. 28. (Norwegian).
25. El-Kassaby YA, Klapste J, Guy RD. 2012. Breeding without breeding:selection using the genomic best linear unbiased predictor method (GBLUP). New Forest. 43:631–637. doi:10.1007/s11056-012-9338-4
26. Fady B, Cottrell J, Ackzell L, Alía R, Muys B, Prada A, González-Martínez, SC. 2016. Forests and global change:what can genetics contribute to the major forest management and policy challenges of the twenty-first century? Reg Environ Change. 16:927–939. doi:10.1007/s10113-015-0843-9
27. Forsberg D, Warensjö M. 2001. Grain angle variation:a major determinant of twist in sawn Picea abies (L.) Karst. Scan J For Res. 16:269–277. doi:10.1080/713785122
28. Gong P, Rosvall O. 2008. Contribution of seed orchards to timber harvest in the short-run and in the long-run. In:Lindgren D, editor. Seed orchards. Proceedings from a conference at Umeå, Sweden; Sept 26–28. Accessed 11 February 2016. Available from:http://daglindgren.upsc.se/Umea07/ZProcFinalFeb08.pdf
29. Gould P, Marshall D. 2010. Incorporation of genetic gain into growth projections of douglas-fir using ORGANON and the forest vegetation simulator. West J Appl For. 25:55–61.
30. Gräns D, Hannrup B, Isik F, McKeand S. 2009. Genetic variation and relationships to growth traits for microfibril angle, wood density and modulus of elasticity in Picea abies clonal trials in southern Sweden. Scand J For Res. 24:494–503. doi:10.1080/02827580903280061
31. Graudal L, Kjær ED, Canger S. 1995. A systematic approach to the conservation of genetic resources of trees and shrubs in Denmark. For Ecol Manage. 73:117–134. doi:10.1016/0378-1127(94)03497-K
32. Graudal L, Nielsen UB, Schou E, Thorsen BJ, Hansen JK, Bentsen NS, Johannsen VK. 2013. Muligheder for bæredygtig udvidelse af dansk produceret vedmasse 2010-2100. Perspektiver for skovenes bidrag til grøn omstilling mod en biobaseret økonomi. [Prospects for the contribution of forests to a green transition towards a bio-based economy. Options for a sustainable increase of wood production from Danish Forests 2010-2110] IGN/Skov, IFRO/Skov & Landskab, Seminar version/2013.3.22, Københavns Universitet, 70 pp. (Danish).
33. Haapanen M, Hynynen J, Ruotsalainen S, Siipilehto J, Kilpeläinen M., 2016. Realised and projected gains in growth, quality and simulated yield of genetically improved Scots pine in southern Finland. Eur J For Res. Available from:http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10342-016-0989-0. doi:10.1007/s10342-016-0989-0
34. Haapanen M, Mikola J. 2008. Metsänjalostus 2050 — pitkän aikavälin metsänjalostusohjelma [Forest Tree Breeding 2050–programme for long-term tree breeding]. Working Papers of the Finnish Forest Research Institute 71. 50 p.
35. Haapanen M, Velling P, Annala ML. 1997. Progeny trial estimates of genetic parameters for growth and quality traits in Scots Pine. Silva Fenn. 31:3–12. doi:10.14214/sf.a8506
36. Hagqvist R, Hahl J. 1998. Rauduskoivun siemenviljelysten jalostushyöty Etelä- ja Keski-Suomessa. [Summary:Genetic gain provided by seed orchards of Silver birch in Southern and Central Finland.] Reports from the Foundation for Forest Tree Breeding 13:1–32. (Finnish).
37. Hallingbäck HR, Jansson G, Hannrup B. 2008. Genetic parameters for grain angle in 28-year-old Norway spruce progeny trials and their parent seed orchard. Ann For Sci. 65:1–8. doi:10.1051/forest:2008005
38. Hallingbäck HR, Jansson G, Hannrup B. 2010. Genetic correlations between spiral grain and growth and quality traits in Picea abies. Can J For Res. 40:173–183. doi:10.1139/X09-173
39. Hannrup B, Cahalan C, Chantre G, Grabner M, Karlsson B, Le Bayon I, Jones GL, Müller U, Pereira H, Rodrigues JC, et al. 2004. Genetic parameters of growth and wood quality traits in Picea abies. Scand J For Res. 19:14–29. doi:10.1080/02827580310019536
40. Hansen F, Nielsen UB, Graudal L. 2013. Analyse af muligheder for at øge biomasseproduktionen fra de danske skove gennem forædling. Baggrundsnotat til Graudal L, Nielsen UB, Schou E, Thorsen BJ, Hansen JK, Bentsen NS, Johannsen V (2013) Perspektiver for skovenes bidrag til grøn omstilling mod en biobaseret økonomi. Muligheder for bæredygtig udvidelse af dansk produceret vedmasse 2010-2110 [Possibilities to increase biomass production from Danish Forests by means of breeding. Background paper for Graudal L, Nielsen UB, Schou E, Thorsen BJ, Hansen JK, Bentsen NS, Johannsen V (2013):Prospects for the contribution of forests to a green transition towards a bio-based economy. Options for a sustainable increase of wood production from Danish Forests 2010-2110], IGN/Skov & Landskab, 17 pp. (Danish).
41. Hansen JK. 1999. Genetic variation of spiral grain in Sitka spruce growing in Denmark. Multiple-trait selection for improved timber quality [PhD thesis]. Arboretum, Copenhagen:Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University, Department of Economics and Natural Resources, 111 pp.
42. Hansen JK, Jørgensen BB, Stoltze P. 2003. Variation of quality and predicted economic returns between European beech (Fagus sylvatica L.). Silvae Genet. 52:185–197.
43. Hansen JK, Kromann HK. 2005. Variation mellem danske bøgeprovenienser [Variation among Danish beech provenances]. Videnblad. 3:3–39. Skov & Landskab, Københavns Universitet. (Danish).
44. Hansen JK, Roulund H. 1997. Genetic parameters for spiral grain, stem form, pilodyn and growth in 13 years old clones of Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis (BONG.) CARR.). Silvae Genet. 46:107–113.
45. Hansen OK. 2006. Integrating molecular genetic methods in seed source management and breeding activities of Nordmann fir [PhD thesis]. Denmark:University of Copenhagen, 37 pp.
46. Hansen OK, Mc Kinney LV. 2010. Establishment of a quasi-field trial in Abies nordmanniana–test of a new approach to forest tree breeding. Tree Genet Genomes. 6:345–355. doi:10.1007/s11295-009-0253-6
47. Harju AM, Nikkanen T. 1996. Reproductive success of orchard and nonorchard pollens during different stages of pollen shedding in Scots pine seed orchard. Can J For Res. 26:1096–1102. doi:10.1139/x26-121
48. Hickler T, Vohland K, Feehan J, Miller P, Smith B, Costa L, Giesecke T, Fronzek S, Carter T, Cramer W, et al. 2012. Projecting the future distribution of European potential natural vegetation zones with a generalized, tree species-based dynamic vegetation model. Global Ecol Biogeogr. 21:50–63. doi:10.1111/j.1466-8238.2010.00613.x
49. Hong Z, Fries A, Wu HX. 2015. Age trend of heritability, genetic correlation, and efficiency of early selection for wood quality traits in Scots pine. Can J For Res. 45:817–825. doi:10.1139/cjfr-2014-0465
50. Hylen G. 1997. Genetic variation of wood density and its relationship with growth traits in young Norway spruce. Silvae Genet. 46:55–60.
51. Hynynen J. 1999. Haavan ja hybridihaavan kasvu ja tuotos [Yield and growth of aspen and hybrid aspen]. Metsäntutkimuslaitoksen tiedonantoja. 725:25–37 (Finnish).
52. Hynynen J, Ahtikoski A, Siitonen J, Sievänen R, Liski J. 2005. Applying the MOTTI simulator to analyse the effects of alternative management schedules on timber and non-timber production. For Ecol Manage. 207:5–18. doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2004.10.015
53. Hynynen J., Viherä-Aarnio A, Kasanen R. 2002. Nuorten haapaviljelmien alkukehitys [Early development of young hybrid aspen plantations]. Metsätieteen aikakauskirja. 2:89–98 (Finnish).
54. Högberg KA, Hallingbäck HR, Säll H, Johansson M, Jansson G. 2014. Potential for genetic improvement of sawn timber traits in Picea abies. Can J For Res. 44:273–280. doi:10.1139/cjfr-2013-0382
55. Högberg KA, Persson B, Hallingbäck HR, Jansson G. 2010. Relationship between early assessments of stem and branch properties and sawn timber traits in a Scots pine progeny trial. Scand J For Res. 25:421–431. doi:10.1080/02827581.2010.509330
56. IEA. 2013. Nordic energy technology perspectives. OECD/IEA & Nordic Energy Research. Paris:IEA Publications; 211 pp.
57. IPCC. 2007. Climate change 2007:The physical science basis. contribution of Working Group I to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. In:Solomon, S, Qin, D, Manning, M, Chen, Z, Marquis, M, Averty, KB, Tignor, M, and Miller, HL, editors. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
58. Jansson G. 2007. Gains from selecting Pinus sylvestris in southern Sweden for volume per hectare. Scand J For Res. 22:185–192. doi:10.1080/02827580701330894
59. Jansson G, Danell Ö, Stener LG. 1998. Correspondence between single-tree and multiple-tree plot genetic test for production traits in Pinus sylvestris. Can J For Res. 28:450–458. doi:10.1139/x98-004
60. Jansson G, Harrison A. 2013. The importance and management of genetic diversity in forest trees. In:Lee S., Wooliams J, editors. Novel tree breeding. Madrid:Instituto Nacional de Investigación y Tecnología Agraria y Alimentaria (INIA); ISBN:9788474985573.
61. Johnsen Ø. 1989a. Phenotypic changes in progenies of northern clones of Picea abies (L.) Kast. grown in a southern seed orchard. I. Frost hardiness in a phytotron experiment. Scand J For Res. 4:317–330. doi:10.1080/02827588909382569
62. Johnsen Ø. 1989b. Phenotypic changes in progenies of northern clones of Picea abies (L.) Kast. grown in a southern seed orchard. II. Seasonal growth rhythm and height in field trials. Scand J For Res. 4:331–341. doi:10.1080/02827588909382570
63. Johnsen Ø, Daehlen OG, Ostreng G, Skrøppa T. 2005a. Daylength and temperature during seed production interactively affect adaptive performance of Picea abies progenies. New Phytol. 168:589–596. doi:10.1111/j.1469-8137.2005.01538.x
64. Johnsen Ø, Fossdal CG, Nagy N, Molmann J, Daehlen OG, Skrøppa T. 2005b. Climatic adaptation in Picea abies progenies is affected by the temperature during zygotic embryogenesis and seed maturation. Plant Cell Environ. 28:1090–1102. doi:10.1111/j.1365-3040.2005.01356.x
65. Johnsen Ø, Kvaalen, H, Yakovlev I, Dæhlen OG, Skrøppa T. 2009. An epigenetic memory from time of embryo development affects climatic adaptation in Norway Spruce. In:Gusta I., Wisiewski M., Tanio K., editors. Plant cold hardiness–from laboratory to the field. CABI Publications, Wallingford, p. 99–107.
66. Jönsson AM, Bärring L. 2011. Ensemble analysis of frost damage on vegetation caused by spring backlashes in a warmer Europe. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci. 11:401–418. doi:10.5194/nhess-11-401-2011
67. Jönsson AM, Harding S, Krokene P, Lange H, Lindelöw Å, Økland B., Ravn HP, Schroeder LM. 2011. Modelling the potential impact of global warming on Ips typographus voltinism and reproductive diapause. Clim Change. 109:695–718. doi:10.1007/s10584-011-0038-4
68. Keiding H. 1962. Krydsningsfrodigned hos laerk [Hybrid vigour in Larch]. Dansk Skovforen Tidsskr. 47:139–157 (Danish).
69. Kimberley MO, Moore JR, Dungey HS. 2015. Quantification of realised genetic gain in radiate pine and its implication into growth and yield modelling systems. Can J For Res. 45:1676–1687. doi:10.1139/cjfr-2015-0191
70. Kjær ED, Dhakal LP, Lillesø JPB, Graudal L. 2006. Application of low input breeding strategies for tree improvement in Nepal. In:K. Isik, F. Isik, editors. Low input breeding and genetic conservation of forest tree species, proceedings of the IUFRO division 2 joint conference, 9–13 October, Antalya, Turkey. p. 103–109.
71. Kjellström E, Nikulin G, Hansson U, Strandberg G, Ullerstig A. 2011. 21st century changes in the European climate:uncertainties derived from an ensemble of regional climate model simulations. Tellus. 63:24–40. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0870.2010.00475.x
72. Kliger R. 2001. Spiral grain on logs under bark reveals twist-prone raw material. For Prod J. 51:67–73.
73. Kliger R, Johansson M. 2004. Pre-sorting of logs prior to conversion improves straightness of sawn timber. Report on WP 2.5 STRAIGHT Project, Report 04:09. Göteborg, Sweden:Chalmers University of Technology, 42 pp.
74. Kohmann K. 1996. Nattlengdereaksjonen til granplanter fra ulike provenienser og frøplantasjer [Critical night length for bud set of seedlings from provenances and seed orchards]. Rapport fra Skogforsk. 15:1–20 (Norwegian).
75. Kohmann K. 1999. Bred Finnish and Swedish birch families have superior height growth in Norway. In:Skrøppa T, editor. Climatic adaptation of boreal tree species -Tree breeding in the Nordic countries. Proceedings from the joint meeting of the Nordic Group for the Management of Genetic Resources of Trees and the Nordic Arboretum Council. Honne konferansesenter, Biri, June 25–27, 1998. Aktuellt fra skogsforskningen 3:22. Ås:Norwegian Forest and Landscape Institute.
76. Kromann HK, Hansen JK. 2001. 24 egeproveniensers produktion og kvalitet [Production and quality for 24 oak provenances]. Videnblad. 3:3–23. Frederiksberg:Skov & Landskab, Københavns Universitet. (Danish).
77. KSLA. 2006. Klimatet och skogen - Underlag till nationellt forskningsprogram [The climate and the forest–Foundation for a national research program]. KSLAT. 9:1–44. ISSN 0023-5350. (Swedish).
78. Kvaalen H. 2010. Bruk av foredla plantemateriale. God økonomi for skogeigaren og samfunnet. Stiftelsen det norske Skogfrøverk. Artikler skrevet i anledning Skogfrøverkets “Strategi for skogplanteforedling 2010-2040” [Improved forest reproductive materials. Good economy for forest owner and society.] The Norwegian Forest Seed Center. Append. to proposed “Strategy for tree breeding 2010-2040; p. 16–18 (Norwegian).
79. Kvaalen H, Steffenrem A, Johnsen Ø, Edvardsen ØM, Johnskås OR, Øyen BH. 2008. Foredla plantemateriale, skjøtsel for vekst og kvalitet [Improved forest reproductive materials, silviculture for growth and wood quality]. Norsk Skogbruk. 6:26–28 (Norwegian).
80. Larsen JB, Wellendorf H. 1997. Rødgran–proveniensvariation, forædling og frøkildevalg [Norway spruce–provenance variation, breeding and choice of seed source]. In:Larsen JB, editor. Træarts- og proveniensvalget i et bæredygtigt skovbrug. Dansk Skovforenings Tidsskrift 82. København:Dansk Skovforening; p. 144–157 (Danish).
81. Ledig FT, Kitzmiller JH. 1992. Genetic strategies for reforestration in the face of global climate change. For Ecol Manage. 50:153–169. doi:10.1016/0378-1127(92)90321-Y
82. Lee S, Matthews R. 2004. An indication of the likely volume gains from improved sitka spruce planting stock. Information note, Forestry Commission. ISBN 1460-3802
83. Li B, McKeand S, Weir R. 1999. Tree improvement and sustainable forestry–impact of two cycles of loblolly pine breeding in the U.S.A. Forest Genet. 6:229–234.
84. Lowe WJ, Byram TD, Bridgewater FE. 1999. Selecting loblolly pine parents for seed orchards to minimize the cost of producing pulp. For Sci. 45:213–216.
85. Maity SK. 2015. Opportunities, recent trends and challenges of integrated biorefinery:Part II. Renew Sust Energ Rev. Available from:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.08.075
86. McKeand S. 2015. The success of tree breeding in the southern US. BioResources. 10:1–2.
87. Myking T, Rusanen M, Steffenrem A, Kjær ED, Jansson G. 2016. Historic transfer of forest reproductive material in the Nordic region:drivers, scale and implications. Forestry 89:325–337. doi:10.1093/forestry/cpw020
88. Nielsen UB, Madsen P, Hansen JK, Nord-Larsen T, Nielsen AT. 2014. Production potential of 36 poplar clones grown at medium length rotation in Denmark. Biomass Bioenerg. 64:99–109. doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2014.03.030
89. Nikulin G, Kjellström E, Hansson U, Jones C, Strandberg G, Ullerstig A. 2011. Evaluation and future projections of temperature, precipitation and wind extremes over Europe in an ensemble of regional climate simulations. Tellus. 63:41–55. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0870.2010.00466.x
90. Olesen M, Madsen KS, Ludwigsen CA, Boberg F, Christensen T, Cappelen J, Christensen OB, Andersen KK, Christensen JH. 2014. Fremtidige klimaforandringer i Danmark [Future climatic change in Denmark]. Danmarks Klimacenter rapport nr. 6 2014. Danmarks Metereologiske Institut, Klima-, Energi-, og Boligministeriet. ISBN 978-87-7478-652-8, 33 pp. (Danish).
91. Pakkanen A, Nikkanen T., Pulkkinen P., 2000. Annual variation in pollen contamination and outcrossing in a Picea abies seed orchard. Scan J For Res. 15:399–404. doi:10.1080/028275800750172574
92. Paques L. 2013. Forest tree breeding in Europe, State-of-the-art and perspectives. Managing Forest Ecosystems, Springer Science + Business Media, Dordrecht, Netherlands, 527 pp.
93. Petrinovic JF, Gélinas N, Beaulieu J. 2009. Benefits of using genetically improved white spruce in Quebec:the landowner’s viewpoint. Forest Chron. 85:571–582. doi:10.5558/tfc85571-4
94. Rehfeldt GE, Wykoff WR, Hoff RJ, Steinhoff RJ. 1991. Genetic gains in growth and simulated yield of Pinus monticola. For Sci. 37:326–342.
95. Rosvall O, editor. 2011. Review of the Swedish breeding programme. Uppsala:Skogforsk. ISBN:978-91-977649-6-4.
96. Rosvall O, Gong P, Simonsen R. 2006. Den gamla skogen står i vägen för den nya Utvecklingskonferens 2006 [The old forest reduce growth of new forest]. Redogörelse Skogforsk. 2:94–104 (Swedish).
97. Rosvall O, Jansson G, Andersson B, Ericsson T, Karlsson B, Sonesson J, Stener LG. 2001. Genetiska vinster i nuvarande och framtida fröplantager och klonblandningar [Summary:Genetic gains from present and future seed orchards and clone mixes]. Redogörelse nr 1, Uppsala:Skogforsk (Swedish).
98. Rosvall O, Lundström A. 2011. Förädlingseffekter i Sveriges skogar [Summary:Effects of planting genetically improved seedlings on forest growth and potential harvest in Sweden]. Redogörelse nr 1, Uppsala:Skogforsk (Swedish).
99. Rosvall O, Ståhl P. 2008. New Swedish seed orchard program. In:Lindgren D, editor. Seed orchards. Proceedings from a conference at Umeå, Sweden; September 26–28. Accessed 11 February, 2016. Available from:http://daglindgren.upsc.se/Umea07/ZProcFinalFeb08.pdf
100. Roulund H. 2007. Hybridlærk:En forbavsende overlegen træart [Hybrid Larch–an astonishing superior tree species]. Skoven. 39:88–93 (Danish).
101. Rozenberg P, Cahalan C. 1997. Spruce and wood quality:genetic aspects (a review). Silvae Genet. 46:270–279.
102. Rummukainen M. 2003. The Swedish regional climate modelling program, SWECLIM, 1996-2003. Final report. Reports Meteorology and Climatology 104. Norrköping, Sweden:SMHI.
103. Ruotsalainen S. 2014. Increased forest production through forest tree breeding. Scand J For Res. 29:333–344. doi:10.1080/02827581.2014.926100
104. Ruotsalainen S, Nikkanen T. 1998. Kuusen siemenviljelysaineiston menestyminen Pohjois-Suomessa [Survival and growth of Norway spruce seed orchard material in northern Finland]. Metsäntutkimuslaitoksen tiedonantoja. 709:1–33 (Finnish).
105. Simonsen R, Rosvall O, Gong P, Wibe S. 2010. Profitability of measures to increase forest growth. For Pol Econ. 12:473–482. doi:10.1016/j.forpol.2010.03.002
106. Skogsindustrierna. 2016. Framtidsfabriken–så satsar bruken på nya bioprodukter och material [The future mill - new bio-products and materials] Skog & Industri no 2. (Swedish).
107. Skogsstyrelsen. 2015. Antal skogsplantor för användning i Sverige fördelade på trädslag, produktionssätt och härkomst. [Number of seedlings for use in Sweden divided into species, production system and origin.] Accessed 11 February, 2016. http://www.skogsstyrelsen.se/Myndigheten/Statistik/Amnesomraden/Skogsvard-och-miljohansyn/Tabeller--figurer/
108. Skrøppa T, Kohmann K, Johnsen Ø, Johnskås R. 2005. Resultater fra forsøk med avkom fra Kaupanger granfrøplantasje [Results from field trials with progenies from Kaupanger (spruce) seed orchard]. Rapport fra Skogforskningen. 8:1–18 (Norwegian).
109. Skrøppa T, Kohmann K, Johnsen Ø, Steffenrem A, Edvardsen ØM. 2007. Field performance and early test results of offspring from two Norway spruce seed orchards containing clones transferred to warmer climates. Can J For Res. 37:515–522. doi:10.1139/X06-253
110. Skrøppa T, Kohmann K, Sand R, Skaret G. 2006. Overlevelse, høydevekst og skader i forsøk med avkom fra Lyngdal frøplantasje og provenienser [Survival, height growth and damages in trials with progenies from Lyngdal seed orchard and forest stands]. Rapport fra Skogforskningen. 4:1–20 (Norwegian).
111. Steffenrem A. 2008. Genetic variation in structural wood quality traits in Norway spruce and implications for tree breeding [PhD dissertation]. Norwegian University of Life Sciences.
112. Steffenrem A, Kvaalen H, Høibø OA, Edvardsen ØM, Skrøppa T. 2009. Genetic variation of wood quality traits and relationships with growth in Picea abies. Scand J For Res. 24:15–27. doi:10.1080/02827580802641215
113. Steffenrem A, Lindland F, Skrøppa T. 2008. Genetic and environmental variation of internodal and whorl branch formation in a progeny trial of Picea abies. Scand J For Res. 23:290–298. doi:10.1080/02827580802249118
114. Steffenrem A, Skaret G. 2013. Foredling av lutz-gran i Nord-Norge [Breeding of Lutz-Spruce for Northern Norway]. Skogfrøverkets årsmelding 2013:22–25 (Norwegian).
115. Steffenrem A, Solheim H, Skrøppa T. 2016. Genetic parameters for wood quality traits and resistance to the pathogens Heterobasidion parviporum and Endoconidiophora polonica in a Norway spruce breeding population. Eur J For Res. 1–11. doi:10.1007/s10342-016-0975-6
116. Stener LG, editor. 2015. The status of tree breeding and its potential for improving biomass production–a review of breeding activities and genetic gains in Scandinavia and Finland. Uppsala:Skogforsk.
117. Stener LG, Jansson G. 2005. Improvement of Betula pendula by clonal and progeny testing of phenotypically selected trees. Scand J For Res. 20:292–303. doi:10.1080/02827580510036265
118. Stohr M, Bird K, Nigh G, Woods J, Yanchuk A. 2010. Realized genetic gains in coastal Douglas-fir in British Columbia:implications for growth and yield projections. Silvae Genet. 59:223–233.
119. Thuiller W, Lavergne S, Roquet C, Boulangeat I, Lafourcade B, Araujo MB. 2011. Consequences of climate change on the tree of life in Europe. Nature. 470:531–4. doi:10.1038/nature09705
120. Wellendorf H, Skov E, Kjær ED. 1994. Suggested updating of improvement strategy for Danish-grown Norway spruce. Forest Tree Improvement 25. Hørsholm:Arboretum.
121. White TL, Adams WT, Neal DB. 2007. Forest genetics. Wallingford:CABI Publishing, CAB International.
122. Woods A. 2011. Is the health of British Columbia's forests being influenced by climate change? If so, was this predictable? Can J Plant Path. 33:117–126. doi:10.1080/07060661.2011.563908
123. Wright PJ, Eldridge KG. 1985. Profitability of using seed from the Tallaganda radiate pine seed orchard. Appita J. 38:341–344.
124. Wu HX, Eldridge KG, Matheson AC, Powell MB, McRae TA, Butcher TB, Johnson, IG. 2007. Achievements in forest tree improvement in Australia and New Zealand 8. Successful introduction and breeding of Radiata pine in Australia. Aust For. 70:215–225. doi:10.1080/00049158.2007.10675023
125. Wu HX, Ivkovic M, Gapare WJ, Matheson AC, Baltunis BS, Powell MB, McRae TB. 2008. Breeding for wood quality and profit in Pinus radiata:a review of genetic parameter estimates and implications for breeding and deployment. N Zea J For Sci. 38:56–87.
126. Yanchuk A, Allard G., 2009. Tree improvement programmes for forest health–can they keep pace with climate change? In:Adapting to climate change (Unasylva No. 231/232 Vol. 60, 2009/1-2). Rome:Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
127. Ye TZ, Jayawickrama KJS, StClair JB. 2010. Realized gain from block-plot Coastal Douglas-fir trials in the Northern Oregon cascades. Silvae Genet. 59:29–39.
128. Zobel B, Talbert J. 1984. Applied forest tree breeding. New York:Wiley.