J. For. Sci., 2010, 56(8):348-352 | DOI: 10.17221/34/2010-JFS

Production impacts of forest tree breeding on an example of Norway spruce

J. Kobliha, M. Slávik, V. Hynek, J. Klápště, J. Stejskal
Department of Dendrology and Forest Tree Breeding, Faculty of Forestry and Wood Sciences, Czech University of Life Sciences in Prague, Prague, Czech Republic

The present paper evaluates the height, diameter and stem volume of parental tree progenies. These Norway spruce progenies are compared with the control estimated from tables. The control was overperformed in all measured growth parameters. Heights of selected spruce progenies at the age of 26 years ranged from 9.2 m (K10) to 10.7 m (K2). The control height was 6.4 m. In the evaluation of diameters, progeny K4 showed the best mean dbh (13.7 cm) while the progeny K17 was rated as the thinnest (10.5 cm). We compared these data with the control diameter of 6.5 cm. The mean volumes of selected material varied from 0.097 m3 (K9) to 0.047 m3 (K17) while the kontrol presented 0.0172 m3. Keywords: economic efficiency; forest tree breeding; growth; Norway spruce; production

Keywords: economic efficiency; forest tree breeding; growth; Norway spruce; production

Published: August 31, 2010  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Kobliha J, Slávik M, Hynek V, Klápště J, Stejskal J. Production impacts of forest tree breeding on an example of Norway spruce. J. For. Sci. 2010;56(8):348-352. doi: 10.17221/34/2010-JFS.
Share...
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. Andersson B., Elfving B., Persson T., Ericsson T., Gregorsson B. 2003): Performance of improved Pinus sylvestris in Northern Sweden. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research, 18: 199-206 Go to original source...
    2. Cornelius J. (1994a): Heritabilities and additive genetic coefficients of variation in forest trees. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 24: 372-379. Go to original source...
    3. Cornelius J. (1994b): The effectiveness of plus tree selection for yield. Forest Ecology and Management, 67:23-34. Go to original source...
    4. Černý M., Paez J., Malik Z. (1996): Growth Tables of the Main Tree Species in the Czech Republic (Spruce, Pine, Beech, Oak). Prague, IFER: 245. (in Czech)
    5. Falconer D.S., Mackay T.F.C. (1996): Introduction to Quantitative Genetics. 4th Ed. Harlow, Essex Addison Wesley Longman.
    6. Jansson G. (2007): Gains from selecting Pinus sylvestris in southern Sweden for volume per hectare. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research, 22: 185-192. Go to original source...
    7. Knowe S.A., Foster G.S. (1989): Application of growth models for simulating genetic gain of loblolly pine. Forest Science, 35: 211-228 Go to original source...
    8. Lamberth C.C., van Buijtenen J.P., Duke S.D., McCullough R.B. (1983): Early selection is effective in 20year-old genetic tests of loblolly pine. Silvae Genetic, 32: 210-215.
    9. Li B., McKeand S., Weir R. (2000): Impact of forest genetics on sustainable forestry - results from two cycles of loblolly pine breeding in the US. Journal of Sustainable Forestry, 10: 79-85. Go to original source...
    10. Magnussen S. (1989): Effects and adjustments of competition bias in progeny trials with single-tree plots. Forest Science, 35: 532-547. Go to original source...
    11. Namkoong G. (1988): Tree Breeding: Principles and Strategies. New York, Springer-Verlag. Go to original source...
    12. Palmer H.E., Newton A.C., Doyle C.J., Thompson S., Stewart L.E.D. (1998): An economic evaluation of alternative genetic improvement strategies for farm woodland trees. Forestry, 71: 333-347. Go to original source...
    13. Thompson T.A. Lester D.T., Martin J.A., Forster G.S. (1989): Using economic and decision making concepts to evaluate and design a corporate tree improvement programme. Silvae Genetica, 38: 1-27.
    14. Vergara R., White T.L., Huber D.A., Shiver B.D., Rockwood D.L. (2004): Estimated realized gains for first-generation slash pine (Pinus elliottii var. elliottii) tree improvement in the southeastern United States. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 34: 2587-2600. Go to original source...
    15. Williams E.R., Matheson A.C. (1994): Experimental Design and Analysis for Use in Tree Improvement. East Melbourne, CSIRO.

    This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY NC 4.0), which permits non-comercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.


    Return to the content