Genetic Parameters and Strategies for Genetic Improvement of Stiffness in Radiata Pine

Open access

Abstract

The two main objectives of this study were: (1) to determine how early is it possible to undertake selection to improve the stiffness of corewood; (2) to determine if the selection based on corewood stiffness could also improve outerwood stiffness, and vice versa. Breastheight data from two progeny trials of Pinus radiata D. Don were used. In the first trial (age 30 years), data on Silviscan predicted stiffness (MoE) was obtained for each growth ring on each core sample from 50 open-pollinated families. In the second trial (age 14 years), data on static-bending MoE was obtained using clearwood sticks (300 × 20 × 20 mm) cut from each tree from 18 control-pollinated families. MoE varied from 3.5 GPa in rings 1-5 to about 17 GPa in rings 21-25. Coefficients of variation of corewood and outerwood MoE were about 20-30% and 15-20% respectively. Estimates of narrowsense heritability for MoE were generally higher (0.50-0.70) in the corewood compared with the outerwood (0.15-0.30). Early selection for MoE could yield substantial gain in corewood MoE but only small gains, if any, in outerwood MoE (especially for rings 21-30). Estimated genetic correlations between density and stiffness appeared moderate in the corewood zone, but high in the outerwood zone. Selection based on density (using 5-mm cores) and acoustic stiffness (using standing tree tools), assessed at age 6-7 years, appeared to be a good option to improve both corewood and outerwood stiffness.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • ANONYMUS (2001): Electronic Hammer: Instructions for Use and Guarantee Conditions. Instrumenta Mechanik Labor (IML) GmbH. Wiesloch Germany.

  • BANNISTER M. H. and M. H. VINE (1981): An early progeny trial in Pinus radiata. 4. Wood density. N. Z. J. For. Sci. 11: 221-243.

  • BETHGE K. and C. MATTHECK (1998): Instruments for detection and evaluation of decay and wood quality in standing trees. In: Proceedings of the eleventh international symposium on nondestructive testing of wood. Madison WI. Edited by D. G. POLLOCK. Forest Products Society Madison USA. pp. 105-115.

  • BIER H. and R. A. J. BRITTON (1999): Strength properties of small clear specimens of New Zealand-grown timbers. Forest Research Bulletin No. 41 NZ Forest Research Institute Rotorua New Zealand.

  • BURDON R. D. and G. YOUNG (1991): Preliminary genetic parameter estimates for wood properties from topranked Pinus radiata progenies and comparison with controls. In: Proceedings of the Australian Forest Council Research Working Group No. 1 Meeting Mt Gambier. Edited by C. HANEL and C. DEAN. Australian Forest Council RWG Mt Gambier Australia. pp. 137-140.

  • BURDON R. D. R. A. J. BRITTON and G. B. WALFORD (2001): Wood stiffness and bending strength in relation to density in four native provenances of Pinus radiata. N. Z. J. For. Sci. 31: 130-146.

  • BORRALHO N. M. G. (1995): The impact of individual tree mixed models (BLUP) in tree breeding strategies. In: Proceeding of the CRCTHF-IUFRO Conference: Eucalyptus plantations: Improving fibre yield and quality Hobart Australia. Edited by B. M. POTTS and N. M. G.

  • BORRALHO. Cooperative Research Centre for Temperate Hardwood Forestry Sandy Bay Tasmania Australia. pp. 141-145.

  • COWN D. J. M. O. KIMBERLEY and I. D. WHITESIDE (1987): Conversions and timber grade recoveries from radiata pine logs. New Zealand Forest Research Institute Bulletin No. 128. pp. 147-161.

  • COWN D. J. J. HEBERT and R. BALL (1999): Modelling Pinus radiata lumber characteristics. Part 1: Mechanical properties of small clears. N. Z. J. For. Sci. 29: 203-213.

  • DUNGEY H. S. A. C. MATHESON D. KAIN and R. EVANS (In press): Genetics of wood stiffness and its components traits in Pinus radiata. Can. J. For. Res..

  • EVANS R. (2003): Wood stiffness by x-ray diffractometry. In: Proceedings of the workshop “Characterisation of the cellulosic cell wall” Grand Lake Colorado USA. Southern Research Station University of Iowa and the Society of Wood Science and Technology.

  • FALCONER D. S. and T. F. C. MACKAY (1996): Introduction to Quantitative Genetics. 4th Edition. Addison Wesley Longman Ltd. Essex UK.

  • GILMOUR A. R. R. THOMPSON B. R. CULLIS and S. J. WELHAM (1997): ASREML User’s manual New South Wales Agriculture Orange Australia.

  • HARRIS P. and M. ANDREWS (1999): Tools and acoustic techniques for measuring wood stiffness. In: Proceeding of the 3rd Wood Quality Symposium: Emerging Technologies for evaluating wood quality for wood processing Rotorua New Zealand. Edited by J. STULEN and B.

  • APTHORP. Forest Industry Engineering Association Rotorua New Zealand. pp. 76-88.

  • JAYAWICKRAMA K. J. S. (2001): Breeding radiata pine for wood stiffness: review and analysis. Aus. For. 64: 51-56.

  • JEFFERSON P. A. J. LEE R. D. BALL and D. J. COWN (2001): Development of a juvenile wood index. New Zealand Radiata Pine Breeding Cooperative Unpublished report.

  • KUMAR S. (2004): Genetic parameter estimates for wood stiffness strength internal checking and resin bleeding for radiata pine. Can. J. For. Res. 34: 2601-2610.

  • KUMAR S. and J. LEE (2002): Age-age correlations and early selection for end-of-rotation wood density in radiata pine. For. Gen. 9: 323-330.

  • KUMAR S. K. J. S. JAYAWICKRAMA J. LEE and M. LAUSBERG (2002): Direct and indirect measures of stiffness and strength show high heritability in a wind-pollinated radiata pine progeny test in New Zealand. Silvae Genet. 51: 256-261.

  • LAUNAY J. M. IVKOVICH L. PAQUES C. BASTIEN P. HIGELIN and P. ROZENBERG (2002): Rapid measurement of trunk MOE on standing trees using RIGIDIMETER. Ann. For. Sci. 59: 465-469.

  • LINDSTRÖM H. P. HARRIS and R. NAKADA (2002): Methods for measuring stiffness of young trees. Holz als Roh und Werkstoff 60: 165-174.

  • LYNCH M. and B. WALSH (1998): Genetics and Analysis of Quantitative Traits. Sinauer Associates Inc. Sunderland MA USA.

  • MACK J. J. (1979): Australian method for mechanically testing small clear specimens of timber. Building Research Technical Paper (Second Series) No. 31 CSIRO Australia.

  • MATHESON A. C. D. J. SPENCER J. G. NYAKUENGAMA J. YANG and R. EVANS (1997): Breeding for wood properties in radiata pine. Pp. 169-179. In: BURDON R. D. MOORE J. M. (Ed.) “IUFRO ‘97 Genetics of Radiata Pine”. Proceedings of NZ FRI-IUFRO Conference 1-4 December and Workshop 5 December Rotorua New Zealand. FRI Bulletin No. 203.

  • MATHESON A. C. R. L. DICKSON D. J. SPENCER B. JOE and J. ILIC (2002): Acoustic segregation of Pinus radiata logs according to stiffness. Ann. For. Sci. 59: 471-477.

  • MATOS C. A. P. D. L. THOMAS D. GIANOLA R. J. TEMPELMAN and L. D. YOUNG (1997): Genetic analysis of discrete reproductive traits in Sheep using linear and nonlinear Models: I. Estimation of Genetic Parameters. J. Anim. Sci. 75: 76-87.

  • ROSS R. R. (1999): Using sound to evaluate standing timber. Int. For. Rev. 1: 43-44.

  • ROSS R. R. and R. F. PELLERIN (1991): Non-destructive testing for assessing wood members in structures: A review. USDA Forrest Service Forest Products Laboratory GTR-70.

  • SAS INSTITUTE INC. (1989): SAS/STAT User’s Guide Version 6 Fourth Edition Volume 2 SAS Institute Inc. Cary NC USA.

  • SHELBOURNE C. J. A. and C. B. LOW (1980): Multi-trait index selection and associated genetic gains of Pinus radiata progenies at five sites. N. Z. J. For. Sci. 10: 307-324.

  • WALKER J. F. C. and R. NAKADA (1999): Understanding corewood in some softwoods: a selective review on stiffness and acoustics. Int. For. Rev. 1: 251-259.

  • XIPING W. R. J. ROSS J. R. ERICKSON J. W. FORSMAN M. MCCLELLAN R. J. BARBOUR and R. F. PELLERIN (2000): Nondestructive evaluation of standing trees with stress wave methods. In: Proceedings of the 12th International Symposium on Nondestructive Testing of Wood Hungary. Edited by F. DIVOS and R. F. PELLERIN. University of Western Hungary Sopron. pp. 197-206.

Search
Journal information
Impact Factor

IMPACT FACTOR 2018: 0.741
5-year IMPACT FACTOR: 0.651

CiteScore 2018: 0.77

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.345
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.362

Cited By
Metrics
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 138 61 2
PDF Downloads 86 44 1