Phenotypic variations in cones and seeds of natural Pinus kesiya var. langbianensis populations in Yunnan Province, China

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1258.2013.00103

Abstract

Abstract:

Aims Our objectives were to determine phenotypic variations in 11 natural Pinus kesiya var. langbianensis populations and their relationship with distributions.
Methods We investigated 16 phenotypic traits for 330 individuals in 11 natural populations of P. kesiya var. langbianensis in Yunnan Province, and used nested analysis, variation coefficient, correlation analysis, and un-weighted pair-group method using arithmetic averages (UPGMA) cluster analysis to analyze results.
Important findings There are significant differences in phenotypic variation among and within populations. Variation is greater within populations (54.76%) than among populations (10.44%). Mean phenotypic differentiation coefficient is 11.95% among populations. Differentiations among populations are relatively small. The average variation coefficient of seed weight is highest (35.51%), followed by cone weight (35.1%); the average variation coefficient of seed size is smallest (8.86%). The seed size is the most stable phenotypic traits. Phenotypic diversity is greatest in Jinggu County and smallest in Jinghong City. There are significant or highly significant correlations among most phenotypic traits in cones and seed, indicating that greater the cone length and cone weight, larger the seed scales, seed size, seed wing, 1000 seeds weight, and the number of seed scales and seeds per cone. The mean annual temperature appears to be the most prominent ecological factor influencing phenotypic traits, followed by the January mean temperature and growing degree days at >5 °C. According to UPGMA cluster analysis, the 11 populations can be divided into two groups and four subgroups due to difference in geographic distance, which is significantly related to annual precipitation and growing degree days at >5 °C.

Key words: cone, correlation analysis, phenotypic differentiation, phenotypic variation, Pinus kesiya var. langbianensis, seed

LI Shuai-Feng,SU Jian-Rong,LIU Wan-De,LANG Xue-Dong,ZHANG Zhi-Jun,SU Lei,JIA Cheng-Xin-Zhuo,YANG Hua-Jing. Phenotypic variations in cones and seeds of natural Pinus kesiya var. langbianensis populations in Yunnan Province, China[J]. Chin J Plant Ecol, 2013, 37(11): 998-1009.

Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

URL: https://www.plant-ecology.com/EN/10.3724/SP.J.1258.2013.00103

https://www.plant-ecology.com/EN/Y2013/V37/I11/998

Figures/Tables 9

References 34

[1]	Beaulieu J, Simon JP (1995). Variation in cone morphology and seed charcaters in Pinus strobus in Quebec. Canadian Journal of Botany, 73, 262-271. DOI URL
[2]	Businský R, Frantík T, Vít P (2013). Morphological evaluation of the Pinus kesiya complex (Pinaceae). Plant Systematics and Evolution, 1-13, doi: 10.1007/s00606-013-0880-0.
[3]	Chen SY, Zhao WS, Wang J (2002). The genetic diversity of natural populations and seed orchards of Pinus kesiya. Journal of Fujian Forestry Science and Technology, 29(3), 1-5. (in Chinese with English abstract)
	[ 陈少瑜, 赵文书, 王炯 (2002). 思茅松天然种群及其种子园的遗传多样性. 福建林业科技, 29(3), 1-5.]
[4]	Chen TY, Liu ZH, Lou AR (2013). Phenotypic variation in populations of Solanum rostratum in different distribution areas in China. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 37, 344-353. (in Chinese with English abstract) DOI URL
	[ 陈天翌, 刘增辉, 娄安如 (2013). 刺萼龙葵种群在中国不同分布地区的表型变异. 植物生态学报, 37, 344-353.] DOI URL
[5]	Dangasuk OG, Panetsos KP (2004). Altitudinal and longitudinal variations in Pinus brutia(Ten.) of Ctete Island, Greece: some needle, cone and seed traits under natural habitats. New Forest, 27, 269-284. DOI URL
[6]	Donahue JK, Upton JL (1996). Geographic variation in leaf, cone and seed morphology of Pinus greggii in native forests. Forest Ecology and Management, 82, 145-157.
[7]	Fu YH (1989). Climate zone of Pinus kesiya var. langbianensis was divided by use of comprehensive comparison with the error. Yunnan Forest Inventory and Planning, (3), 30-33. (in Chinese with English abstract)
	[ 傅云和 (1989). 用误差综合比区划思茅松气候区. 云南林业调查规划, (3), 30-33.]
[8]	Garcia R, Siepielski AM, Benkman CW (2009). Cone and seed trait variation in whitebark pine (Pinus albicaulis; Pinaceae) and the potential for phenotypic selection. American Journal of Botany, 96, 1050-1054. URL PMID
[9]	Ge S, Wang MX, Chen YW (1988). An analysis of population genetic structure of masson pine by isozyme technique. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 24, 399-410. (in Chinese with English abstract)
	[ 葛颂, 王明庥, 陈岳武 (1988). 用同工酶研究马尾松种群的遗传结构. 林业科学, 24, 399-410.]
[10]	Gil L, Climent J, Nanos N, Mutke S, Ortiz I, Schiller G (2002). Cone morphology variation in Pinus canariensis Sm. Plant Systematics and Evolution, 235, 35-51.
[11]	Gonçalves AC, Pommerening A (2012). Spatial dynamics of cone production in Mediterranean climates: a case study of Pinus pinea L. in Potugal. Forest Ecology and Management, 266, 83-93. DOI URL
[12]	Gu YJ, Luo JX, Wu YW, Cao XJ (2009). Phenotypic diversity in natural populations of Picea balfouriana in Sichuan, China. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 33, 291-301. (in Chinese with English abstract)
	[ 辜云杰, 罗建勋, 吴远伟, 曹小军 (2009). 川西云杉天然种群表型多样性. 植物生态学报, 33, 291-301.]
[13]	Hamrick JL, Godt NJW (1990). Allozyme Diversity in Plant Species. Sinauer Association Inc., Sunderland, USA. 43-63.
[14]	Hamrick JL, Godt MJW, Sherman-Broyles SL (1992). Factors influencing levels of genetic diversity in woody plant species. New Forests, 6, 95-124.
[15]	Henttonen H, Kanninen M, Nygren M, Ojansuu R (1986). The maturation of Pinus sylvestris seeds in relation to temperature climate in Northern Finland. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research, 1, 243-249.
[16]	Li B, Gu WC, Lu BM (2002). A study on phenotypic diversity of seeds and cones characteristics in Pinus bungeana. Biodiversity Science, 10, 181-188. (in Chinese with English abstract)
	[ 李斌, 顾万春, 卢宝明 (2002). 白皮松天然种群种实性状表型多样性研究. 生物多样性, 10, 181-188.]
[17]	Li W, Lin FR, Zheng YQ (2013). Phenotypic diversity of pods and seeds in natural populations of Gleditsia sinensis in southern China. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 37, 61-69. (in Chinese with English abstract)
	[ 李伟, 林富荣, 郑勇奇 (2013). 皂荚南方天然种群种实表型多样性. 植物生态学报, 37, 61-69.]
[18]	Liu GF, Zang RG, Liu H, Bai ZQ, Guo ZJ, Di Y (2012). Geographic variation of seed morphological traits of Picea schrenkiana var. tianschanica in Tianshan Mountains, Xinjing of northwest China. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 23, 1455-1461. (in Chinese with English abstract) URL PMID
	[ 刘贵峰, 臧润国, 刘华, 白志强, 郭仲军, 丁易 (2012). 天山云杉种子形态性状的地理变异. 应用生态学报, 23, 1455-1461.] URL PMID
[19]	Mao JF, Li Y, Liu YJ, Liu H, Wang XR (2007). Cone and seed characteristics of Pinus densata and their adaptive fitness implications. Journal of Plant Ecology (Chinese Version), 31, 291-299. (in Chinese with English abstract)
	[ 毛建丰, 李悦, 刘玉军, 刘灏, 王晓茹 (2007). 高山松种实性状与生殖适应性. 植物生态学报, 31, 291-299.]
[20]	Meunier C, Sirois L, Bégin Y (2007). Climate and Picea mariana seed maturation relationships: a multi-scale perspective. Ecological Monographs, 77, 361-376.
[21]	Owens JN, Kittirat T, Mahalovich MF (2008). Whitebark pine ( Pinus albicaulis Engelm.) seed production in natural stands. Forest Ecology and Management, 255, 803-809.
[22]	Peng XM, Wu JC, Zheng YX, Zhang YP, Li GQ (2012). Phenotypic variation in cultivated populations of Azadirachta indica in Yunnan, China. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 36, 560-571. (in Chinese with English abstract) DOI URL
	[ 彭兴民, 吴疆翀, 郑益兴, 张燕平, 李根前 (2012). 云南引种印楝实生种群的表型变异. 植物生态学报, 36, 560-571.] DOI URL
[23]	Sorensen FC, Miles RS (1978). Cone and seed weight relationships in douglas-fir from western and central Oregon. Ecology, 59, 641-644. DOI URL
[24]	Sun YL, Li QM, Xie ZQ (2005). Fruiting characteristics of the endangered species Abies chensiensis. Acta Phytoecol-ogica Sinica, 29, 251-257. (in Chinese with English abstract)
	[ 孙玉玲, 李庆梅, 谢宗强 (2005). 濒危植物秦岭冷杉结实特性的研究. 植物生态学报, 29, 251-257.]
[25]	Wen QZ, Yang XS, Yang ZX, Chen XM, Lai XH, Ding FH (2010). Dynamic changes in Pinus kesiya var. langbianensis forest resources in China. Resources Science, 32, 1621-1626. (in Chinese with English abstract)
	[ 温庆忠, 杨晓松, 杨子祥, 陈晓鸣, 赖兴会, 丁福红 (2010). 中国思茅松林资源动态研究. 资源科学, 32, 1621-1626.]
[26]	Wheeler NC, Guries RP (1982). Population structure, genic diversity, and morphological variation in Pinus contorta Dougl. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 12, 595-606.
[27]	Wu ZY, Zhu YC, Jiang HQ (1987). Yunnan Vegetation. Science Press, Beijing. 398. (in Chinese)
	[ 吴征镒, 朱彦丞, 姜汉侨 (1987). 云南植被. 科学出版社, 北京. 398.]
[28]	Xu J, Wang ZR, Chen YB, Qiu JQ (2004). An analysis of genetic parameters, characters of seed and cone, and cone yield of clones grown in a seed orchard for Pinus massoniana. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 40(4), 201-205. (in Chinese with English abstract)
	[ 徐进, 王章荣, 陈亚斌, 丘进清 (2004). 马尾松种子园无性系结实量、种实性状及遗传参数的分析. 林业科学, 40(4), 201-205.]
[29]	Xu YL, Duan AA, Tang SY, Xu LH (2006). A study of fruiting characteristics of Pinus kesiya var. langbianensis in clonal seed orchard. Journal of West China Forestry Science, 35(3), 39-42. (in Chinese with English abstract)
	[ 许玉兰, 段安安, 唐社云, 许林红 (2006). 思茅松无性系种子园结实习性研究. 西部林业科学, 35(3), 39-42.]
[30]	Xue JR, Jiang HQ (1986). Yunnan Forest. Yunnan Science & Technology Press, Kunming. 167. (in Chinese)
	[ 薛纪如, 姜汉侨 (1986). 云南森林. 云南科技出版社, 昆明. 167.]
[31]	Yu H, Ge S, Huang RF, Jiang HQ (2000). A preliminary study on genetic variation and relationships of Pinus yunnanensis and its closely related species. Acta Botanica Sinica, 42, 107-110. (in Chinese with English abstract)
	[ 虞泓, 葛颂, 黄瑞复, 姜汉侨 (2000). 云南松及其近缘种的遗传变异与亲缘关系. 植物学报, 42, 107-110.]
[32]	Yu SL, Fang WW (2012). New advances in seed geography. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 36, 918-922. (in Chinese with English abstract)
	[ 余顺利, 方伟伟 (2012). 种子地理学研究的新进展. 植物生态学报, 36, 918-922.]
[33]	Zeng J, Zheng HS, Gan SM, Bai JY (2005). Phenotypic variation in natural populations of Betula alnoides in Guangxi, China. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 41(2), 59-65. (in Chinese with English abstract)
	[ 曾杰, 郑海水, 甘四明, 白嘉雨 (2005). 广西西南桦天然居群的表型变异. 林业科学, 41(2), 59-65.]
[34]	Zhu XD, Li TS, Liu XZ, Sun HY, Zhou CF (2006). Studies on fruiting quantity of Pinus armandii clones in the seed orchard and seed quality. Journal of Southwest Forestry College, 26(2), 48-51. (in Chinese with English abstract)
	[ 朱晓丹, 李桐森, 刘小珍, 孙海燕, 周常富 (2006). 华山松无性系种子园结实量与种实性状的关系. 西南林学院学报, 26(2), 48-51.]

种群 Population	纬度 Latitude	经度 Longitude	海拔 Elevation (m)	年平均气温 Mean annual air temperature (℃)	年降水量 Annual precipitation (mm)
昌宁 CN	24°23′	99°25′	1 450-150 0	14.9	1 259.0
景洪 JH	22°26′	100°54′	1 100-120 0	21.8	1 197.6
耿马 GM	23°26′	99°21′	1 170-140 0	18.8	1 311.9
景东 JD	24°38′	100°57′	1 245-140 0	18.3	1 087.0
景谷 JG	23°33′	100°30′	1 100-159 5	20.2	1 232.6
澜沧 LC	22°13′	99°41′	1 390-147 0	19.0	1 522.6
梁河 LH	24°38′	98°20′	990-105 0	18.3	1 357.1
勐海 MH	22°13′	100°17′	1 100-120 0	18.2	1 363.7
普洱 PE	22°45′	100°47′	1 300-137 0	17.7	1 626.5
云县 YX	24°32′	100°12′	1 410-148 0	19.4	904.7
镇沅 ZY	23°59′	101°5′	1 140-137 0	15.8	1 284.8

种群 Population	纬度 Latitude	经度 Longitude	海拔 Elevation (m)	年平均气温 Mean annual air temperature (℃)	年降水量 Annual precipitation (mm)
昌宁 CN	24°23′	99°25′	1 450-150 0	14.9	1 259.0
景洪 JH	22°26′	100°54′	1 100-120 0	21.8	1 197.6
耿马 GM	23°26′	99°21′	1 170-140 0	18.8	1 311.9
景东 JD	24°38′	100°57′	1 245-140 0	18.3	1 087.0
景谷 JG	23°33′	100°30′	1 100-159 5	20.2	1 232.6
澜沧 LC	22°13′	99°41′	1 390-147 0	19.0	1 522.6
梁河 LH	24°38′	98°20′	990-105 0	18.3	1 357.1
勐海 MH	22°13′	100°17′	1 100-120 0	18.2	1 363.7
普洱 PE	22°45′	100°47′	1 300-137 0	17.7	1 626.5
云县 YX	24°32′	100°12′	1 410-148 0	19.4	904.7
镇沅 ZY	23°59′	101°5′	1 140-137 0	15.8	1 284.8

表型性状 Phenotypic trait	均方 Mean square			F值 F value
表型性状 Phenotypic trait	种群间 Among populations	种群内 Within population	随机误差 Random error	种群间 Among populations	种群内 Within population
CL	2 561.48	767.23	32.95	3.34^**	23.28^**
CW	828.27	109.76	6.09	7.55^**	18.04^**
CLW	2.33	0.29	0.02	7.92^**	11.92^**
CWE	3 375.96	493.53	18.72	6.84^**	26.37^**
SSL	340.45	53.48	2.16	6.37^**	24.71^**
SSW	62.41	9.55	0.56	6.54^**	17.16^**
SSLW	0.44	0.21	0.01	2.07	19.70^**
SL	6.50	1.31	0.09	4.97^**	14.80^**
SW	2.21	0.25	0.04	8.82^**	6.95^**
SLW	0.02	0.06	0.01	3.74^**	7.89^**
SWL	184.99	27.56	1.39	6.71^**	19.87^**
SWW	10.66	2.33	0.22	4.57^**	10.61^**
SWLW	1.55	0.51	0.03	3.01^**	15.68^**
SCALE	6 667.30	1 076.28	152.88	6.19^**	7.04^**
SEED	3 822.39	1 490.39	186.83	2.56^**	7.98^**
GW	331.62	63.37	8.54	5.23^**	7.42^**

表型性状 Phenotypic trait	均方 Mean square			F值 F value
表型性状 Phenotypic trait	种群间 Among populations	种群内 Within population	随机误差 Random error	种群间 Among populations	种群内 Within population
CL	2 561.48	767.23	32.95	3.34^**	23.28^**
CW	828.27	109.76	6.09	7.55^**	18.04^**
CLW	2.33	0.29	0.02	7.92^**	11.92^**
CWE	3 375.96	493.53	18.72	6.84^**	26.37^**
SSL	340.45	53.48	2.16	6.37^**	24.71^**
SSW	62.41	9.55	0.56	6.54^**	17.16^**
SSLW	0.44	0.21	0.01	2.07	19.70^**
SL	6.50	1.31	0.09	4.97^**	14.80^**
SW	2.21	0.25	0.04	8.82^**	6.95^**
SLW	0.02	0.06	0.01	3.74^**	7.89^**
SWL	184.99	27.56	1.39	6.71^**	19.87^**
SWW	10.66	2.33	0.22	4.57^**	10.61^**
SWLW	1.55	0.51	0.03	3.01^**	15.68^**
SCALE	6 667.30	1 076.28	152.88	6.19^**	7.04^**
SEED	3 822.39	1 490.39	186.83	2.56^**	7.98^**
GW	331.62	63.37	8.54	5.23^**	7.42^**

表型性状 Phenotypic trait	种群 Population											平均值 Mean value
表型性状 Phenotypic trait	CN	JH	GM	JD	JG	LC	LH	MH	PE	YX	ZY	平均值 Mean value
CL	59.36 ± 8.48^d	63.95 ± 8.04^abcd	61.26 ± 10.02^cd	64.87 ± 9.45^abcd	69.47 ± 14.66^a	61.54 ± 8.63^cd	59.86 ± 10.35^d	62.32 ± 10.96^bcd	66.43 ± 9.57^abc	62.87 ± 11.61^bcd	67.91 ± 8.39^ab	63.62 ± 10.63
CW	32.75 ± 2.94^de	31.43 ± 3.05^e	33.83 ± 3.59^cd	35.61 ± 3.95^abc	34.09 ± 4.56^cd	32.89 ± 3.02^de	34.50 ± 4.53^bcd	35.25 ± 4.56^bc	36.35 ± 3.62^ab	33.65 ± 5.27^cd	38.10 ± 4.25^a	34.40 ± 4.37
CLW	1.81 ± 0.22^bc	2.04 ± 0.22^a	1.81 ± 0.24^bc	1.83 ± 0.21^bc	2.03 ± 0.30^a	1.87 ± 0.17^b	1.74 ± 0.20^c	1.77 ± 0.21^bc	1.83 ± 0.22^bc	1.87 ± 0.26^b	1.79 ± 0.21^bc	1.85 ± 0.24
CWE	21.74 ± 6.38^d	21.38 ± 5.76^d	22.57 ± 7.49^cd	27.87 ± 8.53^b	26.84 ± 10.09^bc	22.01 ± 5.99^d	21.47 ± 7.72^d	24.78 ± 8.70^bcd	28.73 ± 9.19^b	24.57 ± 8.31^bcd	32.99 ± 8.92^a	25.00 ± 8.77
SSL	23.43 ± 2.43^cde	23.07 ± 1.88^de	24.19 ± 3.27^bcd	24.89 ± 3.04^abcd	26.05 ± 5.05^ab	23.04 ± 2.38^de	24.96 ± 3.06^abc	26.00 ± 2.99^ab	26.65 ± 3.10^a	22.11 ± 4.01^e	25.90 ± 3.20^ab	24.57 ± 3.53
SSW	12.39 ± 1.09^cd	12.82 ± 1.34^bc	12.35 ± 1.21^cd	13.25 ± 1.32^ab	13.28 ± 1.79^ab	12.85 ± 1.18^bc	13.33 ± 1.47^ab	13.45 ± 1.36^ab	13.78 ± 1.55^a	11.70 ± 1.66^d	13.76 ± 1.46^a	13.00 ± 1.54
SSLW	1.90 ± 0.17^ab	1.81 ± 0.19^b	1.97 ± 0.24^a	1.89 ± 0.27^ab	1.95 ± 0.21^a	1.80 ± 0.16^b	1.88 ± 0.19^ab	1.94 ± 0.18^a	1.94 ± 0.20^a	1.89 ± 0.24^ab	1.89 ± 0.21^ab	1.90 ± 0.21
SL	5.58 ± 0.45^c	5.66 ± 0.41^bc	5.67 ± 0.47^bc	5.68 ± 0.45^bc	6.07 ± 1.02^a	5.63 ± 0.40^c	5.68 ± 0.46^bc	5.95 ± 0.48^ab	5.88 ± 0.45^abc	5.28 ± 0.51^d	5.68 ± 0.49^bc	5.70 ± 0.58
SW	3.39 ± 0.20^c	3.48 ± 0.23^bc	3.47 ± 0.22^bc	3.46 ± 0.33^c	3.44 ± 0.37^c	3.49 ± 0.20^bc	3.39 ± 0.25^c	3.67 ± 0.29^a	3.59 ± 0.27^ab	3.20 ± 0.25^d	3.39 ± 0.36^c	3.45 ± 0.29
SLW	1.65 ± 0.12^b	1.63 ± 0.09^b	1.64 ± 0.11^b	1.65 ± 0.13^b	1.76 ± 0.20^a	1.62 ± 0.10^b	1.68 ± 0.12^b	1.62 ± 0.11^b	1.64 ± 0.12^b	1.66 ± 0.15^b	1.68 ± 0.16^b	1.66 ± 0.14
SWL	13.63 ± 1.62^cde	13.39 ± 1.36^de	14.23 ± 2.63^bcd	15.03 ± 2.42^ab	15.25 ± 3.73^ab	12.71 ± 1.42^e	14.82 ± 2.38^abc	15.02 ± 2.09^ab	16.09 ± 2.08^a	12.55 ± 2.81^e	14.36 ± 2.50^bcd	14.28 ± 2.59
SWW	6.46 ± 0.59^de	6.63 ± 0.77^bcd	6.49 ± 0.64^cde	6.76 ± 0.76^abcd	6.82 ± 0.94^abcd	6.60 ± 0.62^bcd	6.86 ± 0.74^abcd	7.00 ± 0.68^ab	7.13 ± 0.62^a	6.20 ± 0.86^e	6.85 ± 0.90^abcd	6.71 ± 0.79
SWLW	2.12 ± 0.27^ab	2.03 ± 0.21^bc	2.20 ± 0.43^ab	2.25 ± 0.40^a	2.22 ± 0.37^ab	1.94 ± 0.23^c	2.17 ± 0.31^ab	2.16 ± 0.31^ab	2.26 ± 0.26^a	2.03 ± 0.39^bc	2.11 ± 0.38^ab	2.14 ± 0.34
SCALE	106.91 ± 14.89^bc	95.81 ± 13.07^d	102.24 ± 17.74^bcd	100.15 ± 17.07^cd	98.16 ± 19.09^d	101.37 ± 15.48^bcd	98.65 ± 18.4^cd	99.67 ± 19.51^cd	106.87 ± 14.98^bc	119.23 ± 23.77^a	109.05 ± 14.38^b	103.47 ± 18.45
SEED	55.87 ± 19.92^a	60.33 ± 18.36^a	60.46 ± 19.64^a	56.57 ± 21.41^a	45.70 ± 17.33^b	56.43 ± 16.40^a	62.92 ± 22.71^a	57.53 ± 19.70^a	65.22 ± 18.45^a	56.83 ± 25.59^a	55.32 ± 17.86^a	57.55 ± 20.43
GW	17.08 ± 3.34^b	17.96 ± 3.31^ab	17.55 ± 3.21^ab	18.90 ± 4.16^ab	18.88 ± 5.77^ab	17.51 ± 3.87^ab	16.94 ± 4.27^b	19.43 ± 5.69^ab	19.95 ± 3.85^a	14.04 ± 3.12^c	17.23 ± 4.23^b	17.68 ± 4.39