Life history and genetic diversity in red pine: implications for gene conservation in forestry

Abstract

Red pine, Pinus resinosa Alt., is a suffusively rare species throughout its geographical range, occurring as small, highly fragmented populations. Such species are particularly vulnerable to the genetic and demographic stochasticity that can lead to local extinction and losses of genetic variation. Red pine illustrates the difficulty that species with long generation tlmes have in recovering genetic diversity once it has been lost. Tree species that lose their genetic diversity may not recover the genetic variation required for effective adaptive responses to environmental challenges. Population declines in rare tree species should be viewed with greater concern by forest managers because the loss of a tree species threatens ecological stability and future economic potential in areas of limited biodiversity. Newfoundland's red pine population provides an example for a broader discussion of concepts in population ecology and genetlcs useful in developing gene conservation efforts for tree populations characterized by fragmented distributions, small population sizes, and declining population numbers.Key words: population ecology, genetic diversity, gene conservation, metapopulation, reproductive success Le pin rouge, Pinus resinosa Ait., constitue une espbce relativement rare dans toute sa distribution gkographique, for-mant de petites populations grandement fragmentkes. ~n e telle espbce est particulibrement vulnirable en terme de gCnCticlue e t d e dkmographie stochastiques pouvant mener h une extinction locale et a des pertes de variation gtnttique. Le pin rouge illustre la difficult6 qu'ont les espbces a longue ptriode de genCration pour rCcupCrer la diversit6 gCnCtique qu'elles ont perdue. Les espbces arboricoles qui ont perdu leur diversite gCnCtique peuvent ne pas rCcupCrer la variation gCnCtique requise pour s'adapter de faqon efficiente aux conditions climatiques. Le dCclin des populations parmi les espbces d'arbres peu nombreux devrait &re perqu avec une plus grande inquiCtude chez les amCnagistes forestiers car la perte d'une espbce d'arbre menace . . la stabiit~ Ccologique et le pbtentiel kon&mique futur dans les rCgions a biodiversitC limitCe. Les populations de pin rouge de Terre-Neuve constitue un exemple pour une discussion plus tlaborke sur les concepts d'Ccologie des populations et sur I'utilitC de la gCnCtique dans le dCveloppement des efforts de conservation des populations arboricoles caractCrisCes par une distribution fragmentCe, une faible dimension des populations, et un nombre de population en dCclin.

Global to local genetic diversity indicators of evolutionary potential in tree species within and outside forests

“…For instance, the California endemic Pinus torreyana (Ledig and Conkle, 1983) is genetically narrow (''depauperate''), but Cedrus brevifolia (Eliades et al, 2011), which has a distribution limited to a small area of Cyprus, is one of the most diverse conifers. Conversely, widely distributed species such as the Mediterranean Pinus pinea (Vendramin et al, 2008) and the North American Pinus resinosa (Echt et al, 1998;Mosseler, 1991Mosseler, , 1992Allendorf et al, 1982) are genetically depauperate species. Bottleneckrelated evolutionary factors may explain such discrepancies (e.g.…”

Chloroplast microsatellites reveal population genetic diversity in red pine, Pinus resinosa Ait.

“…The most recent drastic decrease in population size to have affected the species is thought to have occurred during the last Pleistocene glaciation 20 000 years ago, when red pine was restricted to refugial populations in the Appalachian highlands of present day West Virginia (Fowler & Morris 1977). The disjunct, dispersed population structure found within the species' current range promotes inbreeding which further increases homozygosity (Fowler & Lester 1970;Mosseler 1992). This type of population structure, and low genetic diversity, are characteristics of a metapopulation, in which subpopulations have restricted gene flow and undergo periodic and localized colonizations, bottlenecks and extinctions (Pimm et al 1989;Hedrick & Gilpin 1997).…”

“…This type of population structure, and low genetic diversity, are characteristics of a metapopulation, in which subpopulations have restricted gene flow and undergo periodic and localized colonizations, bottlenecks and extinctions (Pimm et al 1989;Hedrick & Gilpin 1997). A nonequilibrium metapopulation structure of red pine, characterized by an excess of local extinctions over local colonizations, has been proposed by Mosseler (1992).…”

“…Some variation of growth and reproductive traits among provenances has been reported, but it is much less than that observed for other northern pines such as P. strobus and P. banksiana, and the heritability of the variation has not been established (Fowler 1965c;Wright et al 1972;Ager et al 1983). Even though a few novel mutant forms are known (Mosseler 1992), morphological and phenological uniformity are considered general characteristics of the species (Fowler 1964;Fowler & Lester 1970). A narrow genetic base puts red pine at risk of extinction from exotic pests, disease epidemics, or rapid climate change.…”

Criteria and Indicators of Sustainable Forest Management in a Changing Climate: An Evaluation of Canada’s National Framework

“…6 Species migration; genetic maladaptation; seed transfer guidelines Cumming & Burton, 1996;Mátyás, 1997;Flemming et al, 2002;Gray, 2005;O'Neill et al, 2008; Uninfluenced & new indicator 1.3.2. 13 Species migration; genetic maladaptation; seed transfer guidelines; loss of biogeographic stability Mosseler, 1992;Rogers & Ledig, 1996;McCarty, 2001;Flemming et al, 2002;Scott & Lemieux, 2005;Beardmore et al, 2006;Gray, 2005;Groom et al, 2006;Government of Canada, 2009 Chaplin et al, 1995;Braswell et al, 1997;Colombo & Buse, 1998;Peng & Apps, 1999;Dale et al, 2001;Gitay et al, 2001;Schimel et al, 2001;Zhou et al, 2001;Norby et al, 2005;Bunn & Goetz, 2006;Bernier, 2007;Zhang et al, 2008;Friend, 2010;McMahon et al, 2010 Fleming & Candau, 1998;Fleming, 2000;Peterson, 2000;Dale et al, 2001;Harper et al, 2004;Pederson, 2004;Carroll, 2006;Hogg & Bernier, 2006;Gray, 2008;Flannigan et al, 2009 Chaplin et al, 1995;Gitay et al, 2001;Schimel et al, 2001;Norby et al, 2005;Bond-Lamberty et al...…”