Larix decidua polonicain Western Europe

First results from a joined European network of progeny trials

Pâques Luc E.INRA-Orléans

Unité AGPF

Context

European larch shows a large intra-specific variation, Populations from Central Europe are of special

interest (core of the gene pool),

(from Schober 1981 and 1985, in Weisgerber and Sindelar 1992).

Context

– ecological flexibility– behaviour to drought stress– vigour– canker-resistance– wood quality

But– stem form is mostly poor.

Central Poland origins show original traits in terms of :

Ex.Curnel et al. 2008

Results gained and published from IUFRO international trials with a limited set of provenances

Objectives

• to broaden the geographic origin of the provenances,• to get a better picture of the structuration of the genetic

variability,• to examine seed transfer possibilities from East to West,• to confirm the interest of polish larch for wood quality

and problems connected with stem straightness.

• to broaden the breeding population,• to take benefits of polish larch properties in interspecific

hybridization.

Material & Methods

• Joined cone collection by INRA & IBL in Mont Gory Swietokezyski in Dec.1987,

• 157 open-pollinated progenies, randomly chosen (except distances and level of fructification),

• in 4 autochtonous ‘stands’ (mainly old natural reserves).

• material shared with IBL and SRFGx

Site Country Region Longitude Latitude Altitude (m)

Année semis

Area (ha)

Ecartements (m)

Nber of progenies

Design

FC.Arcey (25) F Jura 6°35’ E 47°30’ N 410 1989 5.84 2.5x2.5 157 IRBD, 1 tree plot FD.Plachet (52) F Lorraine 4°59’ E 48°15’ N 320 1989 7.14 3x3 157 IRBD, 1 tree plot Crozet (23) F Plateau de

Millevaches 2°11’ E 45°48’ N 750 1990 5.06 3x3 157 IRBD, 1 tree plot

Bort (87) F Ouest Massif Central

1°20’ E 45°56’ N 350 1990 4.48 3x3 157 IRBD, 1 tree plot

FD. Apremont (55) F Plateau Meuse 5°37’ E 48°52’ N 350 1989 5.00 3x3 - FD. Eu (76) F Normandie 1°37’ E 49°53’ N 190 1990 1.51 3x3 - Kutno PL 19°19’ E 52°16’ N 1996 1.9 2x2 157 1 tree plot Zwierzyniec PL 23°02’ E 50°46’ N 1998 2.2 2x2 85 1 tree plot Rance B Fagne 4°15’E 50°10’ N 250 1.2 3x2 93 CRBD, 8 trees raw

plot Villance B Ardennes 5°14’E 50°00’ N 425 1.4 3x2 93 CRBD, 8 trees raw

plot

1994

1994

Field trials

8 progeny trials + 2 conservation plots

Ecologically contrasting sites

Mean annual temperatures

-10.0

-5.0

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

T°C

La Courtine (23)Limoges (87)Kielce (PL)

Mean annual precipitation

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Pré

c. (

mm

)

La Courtine (23)

Limoges (87)

Skarzysko K. (PL)

Suchedniow (PL)

From less than 150 m up to 750 m asl.From very low up to high pH soils

Survival

2.74.8

11.1

19.4

8.7

22.1

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Bort Croze Plachet Arcey Rance Villance

polonica

sudetica

Alpine

Japanese

Hybrids

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

polo

nica

sude

tica

Alp

ine

Japa

nese

Hyb

rids

polo

nica

sude

tica

Alp

ine

Japa

nese

Hyb

rids

polo

nica

sude

tica

Alp

ine

Japa

nese

Hyb

rids

polo

nica

sude

tica

Alp

ine

Japa

nese

Hyb

rids

BortBortBortBortBortCrozeCrozeCrozeCrozeCrozeRanceRanceRanceRanceRanceVillanceVillanceVillanceVillanceVillance

up to 15

up to 10

Bort Croze Rance Villance

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

polo

nica

sude

tica

Alp

ine

Japa

nese

Hyb

rids

polo

nica

sude

tica

Alp

ine

Japa

nese

Hyb

rids

polo

nica

sude

tica

Alp

ine

Japa

nese

Hyb

rids

polo

nica

sude

tica

Alp

ine

Japa

nese

Hyb

rids

BortBortBortBortBortCrozeCrozeCrozeCrozeCrozeRanceRanceRanceRanceRanceVillanceVillanceVillanceVillanceVillance

up to 15

up to 10

Bort Croze Rance Villance

Mortality (%) 7-10 yrs

Globally a better survival than other populations & species

Mortality (%) 14-15 yrs

FC Arcey : mortality (%)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Polonic

a

Sudèt

esAlpe

s

Japo

n

Hybrid

es

Douglas

Epicéa

% m

ort

alit

y

96-98

92-95

91

Sensitivity to drought ?

Top dieback 2003

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

Sudetica Polonica Alps Hybrid Japanese DouglasP

rop

ort

ion

of

stem

s

2003 heat-drought wave : Bort

Top dieback 2003

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

40.0

45.0

50.0

0-10 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-50

% stem height affected

% t

rees

aff

ecte

d

Polonica

Sudetica

Top-dieback may be a serious problem for sudetan & polish

larches

Drought / growth cracks ?

Plachet Bort Arcey Croze

polonica 25(5-57%)

11(0-50%)

6(0-27%)

1(0-11%)

sudetica 13(12-14%)

4(0-9%)

0 0

alpine 7 0 0 0

japanese 0 0 0 0

hybrids 16(6-22%)

5(0-15%)

1(0-8%)

1(0-3%)

Higher frequency of stem cracks in polish larch on all sites

Wind firmness Exp.2.301.5 : Bort : dégâts de la tempête du 12/99

52.0

61.8

80.0 81.3

94.6100.0

83.3

74.3

17.3

15.4

13.316.1

16.7

20.0

14.8

15.5

6.7 5.7

15.8

7.30.53.3

1.7

2.6

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Polonica Sudètes Alpes Japon Hybrides Olgensis Princ.rupp. Douglas

Fré

qu

ence

de

tig

es

Fallen down

45° lining

Slight lining

No damage

Polish larch : nearly 50% stem damaged by wind throw

Meria laricina

A major recurrent problem in moist mild spring in Bort

Polish larch (but also other EL): high sensitivity

Hybrid larch & Japanese larch: low sensitivity

Well…well…

Mortality Top-

dieback

‘Drought’

cracks

Wind

firmness

Meria

Arcey xx (X) n n n

Plachet n (X) xx n n

Bort n xx x xx xx

Croze n n n n n

Rance n ? ? ? ?

Villance xx ? ? ? ?

No mention of canker

And growth… and straightness…?

Arcey Plachet Bort Croze Eu Rance Villance Kutno ZwierzyniecHT 1 xHT 2 x x x x x x xHT 3 x xHT 4 x x x xHT 5 x x x x x xHT 6 x x x x x xHT 7 x x x xHT 8 x x x xHT 9 x x x xHT 10 x x xHT 11 xHT 12 x (x) (x)HT 13HT 14 (x) (x)HT 15

G 6 x xG 7 x xG 8G 9 x x xG 10 x x xG 11G 12 x x xG 13G 14 x xG 15 x x x

SS 4 xSS 5SS 6SS 7 x x x xSS 8SS 9 xSS 10 x xSS 11SS 12 x x xSS 13SS 14 x xSS 15 x x x

Field trial networks and difficulties

• Experimental design• Site preparation• Spacing• Thinning• Traits assessed and

timing

thinned

thinned

thinned

Site ‘fertility’

Total basal area MAI (m²/ha/yr)

0.000

0.500

1.000

1.500

2.000

2.500

Plachet Arcey Croze Villance Rance Bort Eu Kutno Zwierz

Bas

al a

rea

MA

I (m

²/h

a/yr

)

12-15 yrs

Correction for spacing/ mortality/ thinning/ age assessment

Polish sites more vigorous than FR/BE sites (up to 4x more BA MAI !!) ? In France, ratio of 1 to 3 among sites.

Site ‘fertility’Mean annual Height increment

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

Villance Rance Croze Arcey Bort Plachet Kutno Zwierz

MA

I (c

m/y

r)

Mean annual Girth increment

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

3.50

4.00

4.50

Plachet Croze Arcey Rance Villance Zwierz Kutno Bort Eu

Gir

th M

AI

(cm

/yr)

Blue : 4-7 yrs /yellow : 10-14 yrs

Blue: 10-14 yrs / yellow: 10-15 yrs (thinning in Bort & Croze)

Relative performance of polonica vs sudetica and other larch taxa

Relative performance of polonica (Height)

-20.0

-15.0

-10.0

-5.0

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

Villance Rance Croze Plachet Bort Arcey

Rel

ativ

e p

erfo

rman

ce (

%)

sudetica

Japanese

Hybrid

Relative performance of polonica (Girth)

-20.0

-15.0

-10.0

-5.0

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

Rance Villance Bort Croze Arcey Plachet

Rel

ativ

e p

erfo

rman

ce

(%)

sudetica

Japanese

Hybrid

In France

Height: polonica >= to other provenance or taxa

Girth: idem but < to hybrids

In Belgium

(Height: polonica < to others)

Girth: idem

Stem straightness

Stem straightness

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Kutno Zwierz Rance Plachet Villance Bort Arcey Croze

Pro

po

rtio

n o

f tr

ees

(%)

%Straight

%Crooked

crooked straight

From J.Kowalczyk

Stem form:

Worst on Polish sites

Best on French sites

Relative performance of polonica (Stem straightness)

-25.0

-20.0

-15.0

-10.0

-5.0

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

Villance Croze Arcey Rance Bort Plachet

Rel

ativ

e p

erfo

rman

ce (

%)

sudetica

Japanese

Hybrid

Relative performance of polonica (%straight stems)

-50.0

-40.0

-30.0

-20.0

-10.0

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

Croze Villance Rance Arcey Bort Plachet

Rel

ativ

e p

erfo

rman

ce (

%)

sudetica

Japanese

Hybrid

Relative performance of polonica vs sudetica and other larch taxa

Globally polonica

- < to hybrid larch,

- < or = or > to sudetica

- < or = or > to Japanese larch

Summary    sudetica JL HL

Villance survival eq < <

  growth eq << <<

  stem form << < <<

Rance survival eq < <

  growth eq << <<

  stem form << eq eq

Bort survival >> eq >>

  growth >> eq <<

  stem form eq eq <<

Croze survival < eq eq

  growth >> >> <<

  stem form eq eq <<

Arcey survival eq >> >>

  growth >> >> <

  stem form eq eq <<

Plachet survival eq >> >

  growth >> >> <<

  stem form eq >> <<

But a large variability among progenies exists…

Perspectives…

Prog = crop on best 30 trees in PL stand

SO = clonal seed orchard with best 30 clones

Superiority of polonica over other taxa or provenances(Bort- 10yrs)

-40.0

-20.0

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

140.0

Vol-Prog Form-Prog Vol-SO Form-SO

Ob

serv

ed/e

xpec

ted

su

per

iori

ty (

%)

DK FP201

DK FP205

B-VGHAL

JL

Sudetica

Alps

Conclusions

• Polonica larch is globally valuable for French conditions on most sites; questions about the Belgian sites

• Perspectives for selection are favourable and needed (stem form)

• Nevertheless care with regards to behaviour to some abiotic (heat/drought/wind) and biotic stress (Meria) is needed on susceptible sites (ex. Bort, Plachet).