Population Differentiation and Climatic Adaptation for Growth Potential of White Spruce (Picea glauca) in Alberta, Canada

Open access


Genetic differentiation among white spruce populations in Alberta, Canada, was studied using time series data of height and diameter and a climatic index developed by principal component analysis. The objectives were to discern patterns of variation for growth potential and predicted optimum climate; compare optimum climate between populations, between height and diameter at the same age and between height or diameter at different ages; and to see if optimum climate differed from the climate inhabited by populations. Using cluster analysis we found that: (1) populations from mid-latitudes (54° - 57°N) and mid-elevations (600 - 800 m) were grouped together and exhibited high growth potential; populations from north of 57°N were grouped with those from elevations higher than 900m in the Rocky Mountains and exhibited low growth potential; and (2) With minor exceptions, populations from similar climates or geography were grouped together in terms of predicted optimum climate. (3) Analysis of variance showed that optimum climate differed significantly (P < 0.05) among populations; among heights at different ages; among diameters at different ages and between height and diameter at the same ages. However, there was no consistent trend in the direction of change in optimum climate with tree age. (4) The range of climate inhabited by the populations (PI₁ = -5.792 to 4.483) was much wider than the range of their predicted optimum climate (P̂Ō₁ = -1.001 to 0.842), which suggests that in terms of growth potential some populations inhabit sub-optimal climates. Implications of the results on management of white spruce in Alberta are discussed.

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

  • AARD (Alberta Agriculture and Rural Development) (2005): Agricultural land resource atlas of Alberta - frost-free period of Alberta 1971-2000. Available at: http://www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$department/deptdocs.nsf/all/agdex10304.

  • ALBERTA ENVIRONMENT (2005): Alberta Climate Model (ACM) to provide climate estimates (1961-1990) for any location in Alberta from its geographic coordinates. Publ. No. T/749. Alberta Environment Edmonton.

  • ANDALO C. J. BEAULIEU J. and J. BOUSQUER (2005): The impact of climate change on growth of local white spruce populations in Quebec Canada. For. Ecol. Manage. 205: 169-182.

  • CANNELL M. G. R. (1974): Production of branches and foliage by young trees in Pinus contorta and Picea sitchensis: provenance differences in their simulation. J. Appl. Ecol. 11: 1091-1115.

  • CARTER T. R. M. HULME and M. LAL (1999): Guidelines on the use of scenario data for climate impact and adaptation assessment. Task Group on Scenarios for Climate Impact Assessment of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Available at: http://ipcc.ddc.cru.uea.ac.uk.

  • DOAK C. C. (1935): Evolution of folia types dwarf shoots and cone scales of Pinus. Illinois Biol. Monogr. 13: 1-163.

  • EARTHINFO INC. (1994): Database guide. Earthinfo Inc. Boulder CO (on CD ROM). ENVIRONMENT CANADA (1993): Canadian climate normals 1961-1990. Prairie Provinces. Available at: http://climate.weatheroffice.ec.gc.ca/climate_normals/index_e.html.

  • FUTUYMA D. J. (1979): Evolutionary biology. Sinauer Associates Inc. Sunderland ma.

  • GIERTYCH M. (1979): Summary of the results of Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) height growth in iufro provenance experiments. Silvae Genet. 28: 136-152.

  • KRAMER P. J. and T. T. KOZLOWSKI (1979): Physiology of woody plants. Academic Press Inc. San Diego.

  • KRUTZSCH P. (1992): Iufro’s role in coniferous tree improvement: Norway spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karst). Silvae Genet. 41: 143-150.

  • LANGLET O. (1971): Two hundred years genecology. Taxon 20: 653-722.

  • LANGLET O. (1959): A cline or not a cline - a question of Scots pine. Silvae Genet. 8: 13-22.

  • LANNER R. M. (1976): Patterns of shoot development in Pinus and their relationship to growth potential pp. 223-243. In: Tree Physiology and Yield Improvement edited by M. G. R. CANNEL and F. T. LAST Academic Press London/UK.

  • LAROI G. H. and J. R. DUGLE (1968): A systematic and genecological study of Picea glauca and P. engelmannii using paper chromatograms of needle extracts. Can. J. Bot. 46: 649-687.

  • LARSON P. R. (1962): The indirect effect of photoperiod on tracheid diameter in Pinus resinosa. Am. J. Bot. 49: 132-137.

  • LINHART Y. B. and M. GRANT (1996): Evolutionary significance of local differentiation in plants. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 27: 237-277.

  • LOEHLE C. (1998): Height growth rate tradeoffs determine northern and southern range limits for trees. J. Biogeogr. 4: 735-742.

  • MATYAS CS. and C. W. YEATMAN (1992): Effect of geographic transfer on growth and survival of jack pine (Pinus banksiana Lamb.) populations. Silvae Genet. 41: 370-376.

  • MELLEROWICZ E. J. W. K. COLEMAN. R. T. RIDING and C. H. A. LITTLE (1992): Periodicity of cambial activity in Abies balsamea. I. Effects of temperature and photoperiod on cambia dormancy and frost hardiness. Physiol. Plant. 85: 515-525.

  • MORGENSTERN E. K. (1996): Geographic variation in forest trees: Genetic basis and application of knowledge in silviculture. UBC Press Vancouver.

  • NAMKOONG G. (1969): Nonoptimality of local races. In Proceedings of the Tenth Southern Conference on Forest Tree Improvement Texas A&M University College Station Texas. pp 149-153.

  • RAJORA O. P. and B. P. DANCIK (2000): Population genetic variation structure and evolution in Engelmann spruce white spruce and their natural hybrid complex in Alberta. Can. J. Bot. 78: 768-780.

  • REHFELDT G. E. (1978): Genetic differentiation in Douglas- fir populations from the northern Rocky Mountains. Ecology 59: 1264-1270.

  • REHFELDT G. E. C. C. YING D. L. SPITTLEHOUSE and D. A. HAMILTON (1999): Genetic response to climate in Pinus contorta: Niche breadth climate change and reforestation. Ecolog. Monogr. 69: 375-407.

  • REHFELDT G. E. N. M. TCHEBAKOVA Y. I. PARFENOVA W. R. WYKOFF N. A. KUZMINA and L. I. MILYUTIN (2002): Interspecific responses to climate change in Pinus sylvestris. Global change Biol. 8: 912-929.

  • REHFELDT G. E. W. R. WYKOFF and C. C. YING (2001): Physiologic plasticity evolution and impacts of a changing climate on Pinus contorta. Climatic Change 50: 355-376.

  • ROBERDS J. H. J. O. HYUN and G. NAMKOONG (1990): Height response functions for white ash provenances grown at different latitudes. Silvae Genet. 39: 121-129.

  • RWEYONGEZA D. M. R-C. YANG N. K. DHIR L. K. BARNHARDT and C. HANSEN (2007): Genetic variation and climatic impacts on survival and growth of white spruce in Alberta Canada. Silvae Genet. 56: 117-127.

  • SAS INSTITUTE (2004): SAS System for Windows. Version 9.2. Carry NC.

  • SCHMIDTLING R. C. (1994): Use of provenance tests to predict response to climatic change: loblolly pine and Norway spruce. Tree Physiology 14: 805-817.

  • STEPHENSON N. A. (1990): Climatic control of vegetation distribution: The role of water balance. Am. Nat. 135: 649-670.

  • TAIZ L. and E. ZEIGER (2006): Plant Physiology. 4th Ed. Sinauer Associates Inc. Sunderland MA.

  • THOMSON A. M. and W. H. PARKER (2008): Boreal forest provenance tests used to predict optimal growth and response to climate change. 1. Jack pine. Can. J. For. Res. 38: 157-170.

  • THOMSON A. M. C. L. RIDDELL and W. H. PARKER (2009): Boreal forest provenance tests used to predict optimal growth and response to climate change: 2. Black spruce. Can. J. For. Res. 39: 143-153.

  • THORNTHWITE C.W. (1948): An approach toward a rational classification of climate. Geogr. Rev. 38: 55-94.

  • U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE (1994): U.S. divisional and station climatic data and normals. National Climatic Data Center National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Ashille NC. Vol. 1 (on CD ROM).

  • VAARTAJA O. (1954): Photoperiodic ecotypes of trees. Can. J. Bot. 32: 392-399.

  • VAARTAJA O. (1959): Evidence of photoperiodic ecotypes in forest trees. Ecolog. Monogr. 29: 92-111.

  • WANG T. A. HAMANN A. YANCHUK G. A. O’NEIL and S. N. AITKEN (2006): Use of response functions in selecting lodgepole pine populations for future climates. Global Change Biol. 12: 2404-2416.

  • WAREING P. F. and D. L. ROBERTS (1956): Photoperiodic control of cambial activity in Robinia pseudacacia L. New Phytol. 55: 356-367.

  • WU H. X. and C. C. YING (2004): Geographic pattern of local optimality in natural populations of lodgepole pine. For. Ecol. Manage. 194: 177-198.

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
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 245 120 4
PDF Downloads 107 51 2