Advertisement

New Forests

, Volume 45, Issue 2, pp 283–293 | Cite as

Leaf physiology and morphology of Castanea dentata (Marsh.) Borkh., Castanea mollissima Blume, and three backcross breeding generations planted in the southern Appalachians, USA

  • Benjamin O. Knapp
  • G. Geoff Wang
  • Stacy L. Clark
  • Lauren S. Pile
  • Scott E. Schlarbaum
Short Communication

Abstract

Backcross breeding programs have been used to transfer disease resistance and other traits from one forest tree species to another in order to meet restoration objectives. Evaluating the field performance of such material is critical for determining the success of breeding programs. In eastern North America, The American Chestnut Foundation has a backcross breeding program that uses Chinese chestnut (Castanea mollissima Blume) to introduce resistance of the fungal pathogen chestnut blight [Cryphonectria parasitica (Murr.) Barr.] to the native American chestnut [Castanea dentata (Marsh.) Borkh.]. We compared physiological and morphological characteristics among seedlings of American chestnut, Chinese chestnut, and BC1F3, BC2F3, and BC3F3 hybrid chestnuts during their fourth growing season after field-planting. American chestnut and the BC3F3 breeding generation displayed photosynthetic light-response curves that were similar to each other but different from Chinese chestnut. Rates of photosynthesis were higher for American chestnut and the BC3F3 breeding generation when compared to Chinese chestnut for light levels ≥800 μmol m−2 s−1 photosynthetic photon flux density and for maximum photosynthetic capacity. Leaf morphology variables were not different between American chestnut and any of the breeding generations, but leaf area (on a per leaf basis) of Chinese chestnut was lower than that of any other chestnut type. Our results suggest that backcross breeding can be used to transfer desirable traits for restoration of native species threatened by non-native pathogens.

Keywords

Backcross breeding Castanea dentata Light response curve Species restoration Tree improvement 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by the USDA Forest Service, Northern Research Station, Southern Research Station, and the National Forest System of the Southern Region. We would like to thank The American Chestnut Foundation and Fred Hebard in particular, as well as David Casey, Jason Rodriguez, and John Blanton (retired) of the National Forests of North Carolina. We would also like to thank Steven Broom and Jeff Humphries for field assistance and Dr. Christina Wells for support with field equipment and for her physiological expertise.

References

  1. Boardman NK (1977) Comparative photosynthesis of sun and shade plants. Annu Rev Plant Physiol 28:355–377. doi: 10.1146/annurevpp.28.060177.002035 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Braun EL (1950) Deciduous forests of eastern North America. Hafner, New York, p 596Google Scholar
  3. Burnham CR, Rutter PA, French DW (1986) Breeding blight-resistant chestnuts. Plant Breed Rev 4:347–397. doi: 10.1002/9781118061015.ch11 Google Scholar
  4. Clark SL, Schlarbaum SE, Saxton AM, Hebard FV (2012a) Nursery performance of American and Chinese chestnuts and backcross generations in commercial tree nurseries. Forestry 85:589–600. doi: 10.1093/forestry/cps068 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Clark SL, Schlarbaum S, Hebard F, Saxton A, Casey D, Crane B, MacFarlane R, Rodrigue J, Stelick J (2012b) Lessons from the field: the first tests of restoration American chestnut (Castanea dentata) seedlings planted in the Southern Region. In: Butnor (ed) JR Proceedings of the 16th Biennial Southern Silvicultural Research Conference. Gen Tech Rep SRS-173. USDA Forest Service, Southern Research Station, Asheville, NC pp 69–70Google Scholar
  6. Clark SL, McNab H, Loftis D, Zarnoch S (2012c) American chestnut growth and survival five years after planting in two silvicultural treatments in the southern Appalachians, USA. Forests 3:1017–1033. doi: 10.3390/f3041017 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Diskin M, Steiner KC, Herbard FV (2006) Recovery of American chestnut characteristics following hybridization and backcross breeding to restore blight-ravaged Castanea dentata. For Ecol Manage 223:439–447. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2005.12.022 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ellsworth DS, Reich PB (1993) Canopy structure and vertical patterns of photosynthesis and related leaf traits in a deciduous forest. Oecologia 96:169–178. doi: 10.1007/bf00317729 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fenneman NM (1938) Physiography of Eastern United States. McGraw-Hill, New York, p 714Google Scholar
  10. Griscom HP, Griscom BW (2012) Evaluating the ecological niche of American chestnut for optimal hybrid seedling reintroduction sites in the Appalachian ridge and valley province. New For 43:441–455. doi: 10.1007/s11056-011-9291-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hebard FV (2005) The backcross breeding program of the American chestnut foundation. J Am Chestnut Found 19:55–77Google Scholar
  12. Henderson DE, Jose S (2005) Production physiology of three fast-growing hardwood species along a soil resource gradient. Tree Physiol 25:1487–1494. doi: 10.1093/treephys/25.12.1487 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Herrick JD, Thomas RB (1999) Effects of CO2 enrichment on the photosynthetic light response of sun and shade leaves of canopy sweet gum trees (Liquidambar styraciflua) in a forest ecosystem. Tree Physiol 19:779–786. doi: 10.1093/treephys/19.12.779 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ingwell LL, Preisser EL (2010) Using citizen science programs to identify host resistance in pest-invaded forest. Conserv Biol 25:182–188. doi: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2010.01567.x PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Jacobs DF (2007) Toward development of silvical strategies for forest restoration of American chestnut (Castanea dentata) using blight-resistant hybrids. Biol Conserv 137:497–506. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2007.03.013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jacobs DF, Severeid LR (2004) Dominance of interplanted American chestnut (Castanea dentata) in southwestern Wisconsin, USA. For Ecol Manag 191:111–120. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2003.11.015 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Jacobs DF, Selig MF, Severeid LR (2009) Aboveground carbon biomass of plantation-grown American chestnut (Castanea dentata) in absence of blight. For Ecol Manag 258:288–294. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2009.04.014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Jacobs DF, Dalgleish HJ, Nelson CD (2013) Tansley review: a conceptual framework for the restoration of threatened plants: the effective model of American chestnut (Castanea dentata) reintroduction. New Phytol 197:378–393. doi: 10.1111/nph.12020 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Joesting HM, McCarthy BC, Brown KJ (2007) The photosynthetic response of American chestnut seedlings to differing light conditions. Can J For Res 37:1714–1722. doi: 10.1139/x07-039 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Joesting HM, McCarthy BC, Brown KJ (2009) Determining the shade tolerance of American chestnut using morphological and physiological leaf parameters. For Ecol Manag 257:280–286. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2008.09.009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Latham RE (1992) Co-occurring tree species change rank in seedling performance with resources varied experimentally. Ecology 73:2129–2144. doi: 10.2307/1941461 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Liebhold AM, MacDonald WL, Bergdahl D, Mastro VC (1995) Invasion by exotic forest pests: a threat to forest ecosystems. For Sci Monogr 30:1–49Google Scholar
  23. Little EL Jr (1977) Atlas of United States trees, Vol 4, minor Eastern hardwoods. USDA Misc. Pub. No. 1342Google Scholar
  24. Loach K (1967) Shade tolerance in tree seedlings: i. Leaf photosynthesis and respiration in plants raised under artificial shade. New Phytol 66:607–621. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8137.1967.tb05432.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. McCament CL, McCarthy BC (2005) Two-year response of American chestnut (Castanea dentata) seedlings to shelterwood harvesting and fire in a mixed-oak forest ecosystem. Can J For Res 35:740–749. doi: 10.1139/x05-002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. McEwan RW, Keiffer CH, McCarthy BC (2006) Dendroecology of American chestnut in a disjunct stand of oak-chestnut forest. Can J For Res 36:1–11. doi: 10.1139/x05-218 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Paillet FL (2002) Chestnut: history and ecology of a transformed species. J Biogeogr 29:1517–1530. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2699.2002.00767.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Parsons R, Ogsten S (1999) Photosynthesis Assistant. Dundee DD2 IPW. Dundee Scientific, UKGoogle Scholar
  29. Reich PB, Ellsworth DS, Walters MB, Vose JM, Gresham C, Volin JC, Bowman WD (1999) Generality of leaf trait relationships: a test across six biomes. Ecology 80:1955–1969. doi:10.1890/0012-9658(1999)080[1955:GOLTRA]2.0CO;2Google Scholar
  30. Rhoades C, Loftis D, Lewis J, Clark S (2009) The influence of silvicultural treatments and site conditions on American chestnut (Castanea dentata) seedling establishment in eastern Kentucky, USA. For Ecol Manag 258:1211–1218. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2009.06.014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Sniezko RA (2006) Resistance breeding against nonnative pathogens in forest trees—current successes in North America. Can J Plant Pathol 28:S270–S279. doi: 10.1080/07060660609507384 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Sullivan NH, Bolstad PV, Vose JM (1996) Estimates of net photosynthetic parameters for twelve tree species in mature forests of the southern Appalachians. Tree Physiol 16:397–406. doi: 10.1093/treephys/16.4.397 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Wang GG, Bauerle WL, Mudder BT (2006) Effects of light acclimation on the photosynthesis, growth, and biomass allocation in American chestnut (Castanea dentata) seedlings. For Ecol Manag 226:173–180. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2005.12.063 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Wang GG, Knapp BO, Clark SL, Mudder BT (2013) The silvics of Castanea dentata (Marsh.) Borkh., American chestnut, Fagaceae (beech family). Gen Tech Rep SRS-173. USDA Forest Service, Southern Research Station, Asheville, NC p 18 Google Scholar
  35. Wayne PM, Bazzaz FA (1993) Birch seedling responses to daily time courses of light in experimental forest gaps and shade houses. Ecology 74:1500–1515. doi: 10.2307/1940078 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Benjamin O. Knapp
    • 1
    • 4
  • G. Geoff Wang
    • 1
  • Stacy L. Clark
    • 2
  • Lauren S. Pile
    • 1
  • Scott E. Schlarbaum
    • 3
  1. 1.School of Agricultural, Forest, and Environmental SciencesClemson UniversityClemsonUSA
  2. 2.Southern Research StationUSDA Forest ServiceKnoxvilleUSA
  3. 3.Department of Forestry, Wildlife, and FisheriesThe University of TennesseeKnoxvilleUSA
  4. 4.Department of ForestryUniversity of MissouriColumbiaUSA

Personalised recommendations