John A Stanturf, R Kasten Dumroese, Stephen Elliott, Vladan Ivetic, Watit Khokthong, Michael Kleine, Mait Lang, Magnus Löf, Palle Madsen, Cindy Prescott, Timothy Young
(2024)
Restoring Forests and Trees for Sustainable Development
Teresa Hazubska-Przybył, Agata Obarska, Agata Konecka, Joanna Kijowska-Oberc, Mikołaj Krzysztof Wawrzyniak, Alicja Piotrowska-Niczyporuk, Aleksandra Maria Staszak, Ewelina Ratajczak
(2024)
Modulating ascorbic acid levels to optimize somatic embryogenesis in Picea abies (L.) H. Karst. Insights into oxidative stress and endogenous phytohormones regulation
Joseph Fargione, Diane L. Haase, Owen T. Burney, Olga A. Kildisheva, Greg Edge, Susan C. Cook-Patton, Teresa Chapman, Austin Rempel, Matthew D. Hurteau, Kimberley T. Davis, Solomon Dobrowski, Scott Enebak, Rafael De La Torre, Arvind A. R. Bhuta, Frederick Cubbage, Brian Kittler, Daowei Zhang, Richard W. Guldin
(2021)
Challenges to the Reforestation Pipeline in the United States
Conifer somatic embryogenesis has long been recognized as an advanced vegetative propagation technology. Somatic embryogenesis provides a platform for capturing and long-term preservation of elite genotypes and developing commercial scale-up systems for mass production of plants. Although, significant success has been reported in improving conifer somatic embryogenic protocols, little has been presented to describe the complexity of integrating in vitro (laboratory) and ex-vitro (greenhouse) programs for developing a commercial production system capable of delivering tens of millions of conifer somatic seedlings. This integration requires both programs to run in concert and produce propagules capable of surviving and growing under greenhouse conditions at very early stages. It also requires the integration of seedling development events to ensure the production of quality seedlings that meet needs of the forest restoration program. This paper describes the importance of protocol optimization for scaling-up the in vitro and ex vitro programs. The ‘biology of scaling’ is discussed in view of plant cell, embryo, germinant and somatic seedling requirements throughout the program. Logistical issues related to protocol optimization and scale-up are addressed. Specific control points for monitoring and controlling the commercial process are presented. The importance of developing standard operating procedures, media batch records, and quality control systems are discussed. Ultimately, a fully integrated system capable of producing tens of millions of conifer somatic seedlings is presented.
Quality management systems -Fundamentals and vocabulary. (2000). References Anonymous. ISO.
ATTREE, S. M., MOORE, D., SAWHNEY, V. K., & FOWKE, L. C. (1991). Enhanced Maturation and Desiccation Tolerance of White Spruce [Picea glauca (Moench) Voss] Somatic Embryos: Effects of a Non-plasmolysing Water Stress and Abscisic Acid. Annals of Botany, 68(6), 519–525. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.aob.a088291
Barney, C. W. (1951). EFFECTS OF SOIL TEMPERATURE AND LIGHT INTENSITY ON ROOT GROWTH OF LOBLOLLY PINE SEEDLINGS. Plant Physiology, 26(1), 146–163. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.26.1.146
Becwar, M., Chesick, E., Handley, I., & Rutter, M. (1995).
Becwar, M. R., Nagmani, R., & Wann, S. R. (1990). Initiation of embryogenic cultures and somatic embryo development in loblolly pine (Pinustaeda). Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 20(6), 810–817. https://doi.org/10.1139/x90-107
Bonga, J. M. (2015). A comparative evaluation of the application of somatic embryogenesis, rooting of cuttings, and organogenesis of conifers. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 45(4), 379–383. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjfr-2014-0360
Boswell, V. (1929). Factors influencing yield and quality of peas. Bulletin.
Brissette, J. C., Barnett, J. P., & Landis, T. D. (1991). Container Seedlings. In Forestry Sciences (pp. 117–141). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-3800-0_7
Cheliak, W. M., & Klimaszewska, K. (1991). Genetic variation in somatic embryogenic response in open-pollinated families of black spruce. Theoretical and Applied Genetics, 82(2), 185–190. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00226211
Coke, J. (1996). 5, 433.
Cyr, D., & Klimaszewska, K. (2002). Conifer somatic embryogenesis: I. Development. Dendrobiology, 31–39.
Cutting propagation: A guide to propagating and producing floriculture crops. (2006).
Duryea, M. L. (1984). Nursery Cultural Practices: Impacts on Seedling Quality. In Forestry Sciences (pp. 143–164). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-6110-4_15
Egertsdotter, U. (2018). Plant physiological and genetical aspects of the somatic embryogenesis process in conifers. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research, 34(5), 360–369. https://doi.org/10.1080/02827581.2018.1441433
Lighting up profits: understanding greenhouse lighting. (2004).
Fonteno, W., & Dole, J. (2006). Cutting propagation: A guide to propagating and producing floriculture crops. 39–50.
Grossnickle, S. (2011). Tissue culture of conifer seedlings-twenty years on: viewed through the lens of seedling quality. National Proceedings of the Forest and Conservation Nursery Associations.
Riley, L., Haase, D., & Pinto, J. (n.d.).
RMRS-P-65. (n.d.). 139–146.
Grossnickle, S. C. (2012). Why seedlings survive: influence of plant attributes. New Forests, 43(5–6), 711–738. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11056-012-9336-6
Grossnickle, S. C. (2016). Restoration Silviculture: An Ecophysiological Perspective - Lessons learned across 40 years. REFORESTA, 1, 1–36. https://doi.org/10.21750/refor.1.02.2
Grossnickle, S. C., & El-Kassaby, Y. A. (2015). Bareroot versus container stocktypes: a performance comparison. New Forests, 47(1), 1–51. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11056-015-9476-6
Grossnickle, S. C., & MacDonald, J. E. (2018). Seedling Quality: History, Application, and Plant Attributes. Forests, 9(5), 283. https://doi.org/10.3390/f9050283
Grossnickle, S. C., & MacDonald, J. E. (2017). Why seedlings grow: influence of plant attributes. New Forests, 49(1), 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11056-017-9606-4
Grossnickle, S. C., & South, D. B. (2014). Fall Acclimation and the Lift/Store Pathway: Effect on Reforestation. The Open Forest Science Journal, 7(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.2174/1874398601407010001
Grossnickle, S., & South, D. (2017). Seedling quality of southern pines: Influence of plant attributes. Tree Planters’ Notes, 29–40.
Grossnickle, S., Cyr, D., & Polonenko, D. (1996). Somatic embryogenesis tissue culture for the propagation of conifer seedlings: A technology comes of age. 48–57.
Gupta, P., & Grob, J. (1995). Somatic embryogenesis in conifers. 81–98.
Hartmann, H., Kester, D., Jr, D., Geneve, F., & R. (2002). Plant Propagation: Principles and practices.
Klimaszewska, K., bernier-Cardou, M., Cyr, D. R., & Sutton, B. C. S. (2000). Influence of gelling agents on culture medium gel strength, water availability, tissue water potential, and maturation response in embryogenic cultures of Pinus strobus L. In Vitro Cellular & Developmental Biology - Plant, 36(4), 279–286. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11627-000-0051-1
Klimaszewska, K., Devantier, Y., Lachance, D., Lelu, M. A., & Charest, P. J. (1997). Larix laricina (tamarack): somatic embryogenesis and genetic transformation. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 27(4), 538–550. https://doi.org/10.1139/x96-208
Kong, L., Denchev, P., Radley, R., Lobatcheva, I., & Attree, S. (2011). 2, 951.
Kramer, P. (1957). Some effects of various combinations of day and night temperatures and photoperiod on the height growth of loblolly pine seedlings. Forest Sci, 45–55.
Landis, T., Tinus, R., Mcdonald, S., & Barnett, J. (1989). Seedling nutrition and irrigation. The container tree nursery manual. 674.
Landis, T., Tinus, R., Mcdonald, S., & Barnett, J. (1995). The container tree nursery manual, Nursery planning, development, and management. U.S. Department of Agriculture, 674.
Landis, T., Tinus, R., & Barnett, J. (1999). Agriculture Handbook 674. Larcher W (1995) Physiological plant ecology: Ecophysiology and stress physiology of functional groups.
Ledig, F., & Perry, T. (1969). Net assimilation rate and growth in loblolly pine seedlings. Forest Sci, 431–438.
Lelu-Walter, M.-A., Thompson, D., Harvengt, L., Sanchez, L., Toribio, M., & Pâques, L. E. (2013). Somatic embryogenesis in forestry with a focus on Europe: state-of-the-art, benefits, challenges and future direction. Tree Genetics & Genomes, 9(4), 883–899. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11295-013-0620-1
Li, X. Y., & Huang, F. H. (1996). Induction of somatic embryogenesis in loblolly pine (Pinus taeda L.). In Vitro Cellular & Developmental Biology - Plant, 32(3), 129–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02822755
Litvay, J. D., Verma, D. C., & Johnson, M. A. (1985). Influence of a loblolly pine (Pinus taeda L.). Culture medium and its components on growth and somatic embryogenesis of the wild carrot (Daucus carota L.). Plant Cell Reports, 4(6), 325–328. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00269890
Liu, B., & Heins, R. D. (1998). MODELING POINSETTIA VEGETATIVE GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT: THE RESPONSE TO THE RATIO OF RADIANT TO THERMAL ENERGY. Acta Horticulturae, 456, 133–142. https://doi.org/10.17660/actahortic.1998.456.15
Liu, B., & Heins, R. D. (2002). Photothermal Ratio Affects Plant Quality in `Freedom’ Poinsettia. Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science, 127(1), 20–26. https://doi.org/10.21273/jashs.127.1.20
Loach, K. (1988). Water relations and adventitious rooting. Adv Plant Sci Series, 102–116.
Madariaga, F., & Knott, J. (1951). Temperature summations in relation to lettuce growth. 47–152.
May, J. (1985). Seedling growth and development. Chapter, 7–8.
Mexal, J. G., & South, D. B. (1991). Bareroot Seedling Culture. In Forestry Sciences (pp. 89–115). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-3800-0_6
Magoon, C., & Culpepper, C. (1932). Response of sweet corn to varying temperatures from time of planting to canning maturity (No. 04; USDA, FOLLETO 2500.
Pallardy, S. (2008). Physiology of Woody Plants.
Park, Y.-S. (2002). Implementation of conifer somatic embryogenesis in clonal forestry: technical
requirements and deployment considerations. Annals of Forest Science, 59(5–6), 651–656. https://doi.org/10.1051/forest:2002051
Perry, K., Wehner, T., & Johnson, G. (1986). Comparison of 14 methods to determine heat unit requirements for cucumber harvest. Hortscience, 419–423.
Pullman, G. S., & Bucalo, K. (2014). Pine somatic embryogenesis: analyses of seed tissue and medium to improve protocol development. New Forests, 45(3), 353–377. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11056-014-9407-y
Pullman, G., Johnson, S., Peter, G., Cairney, J., & Xu, N. (2003). Improving loblolly pine somatic embryo maturation: comparison of somatic and zygotic embryo morphology, germination, and gene expression. Plant Cell Rep, 8, 747–758.
Pullman, G. S., & Johnson, S. (2002). Somatic embryogenesis in loblolly pine (Pinus taeda L.): improving culture
initiation rates. Annals of Forest Science, 59(5–6), 663–668. https://doi.org/10.1051/forest:2002053
Pullman, G. S., Montello, P., Cairney, J., Xu, N., & Feng, X. (2003). Loblolly pine (Pinus taeda L.) somatic embryogenesis: maturation improvements by metal analyses of zygotic and somatic embryos. Plant Science, 164(6), 955–969. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0168-9452(03)00079-7
Roberts, D. R., Sutton, B. C. S., & Flinn, B. S. (1990). Synchronous and high frequency germination of interior spruce somatic embryos following partial drying at high relative humidity. Canadian Journal of Botany, 68(5), 1086–1090. https://doi.org/10.1139/b90-136
Rose, R., Carlson, W., & Morgan, P. (1990). The target seedling concept.
(N.d.). 1–8.
Sayer, M. A. S., Brissette, J. C., & Barnett, J. P. (2005). Root growth and hydraulic conductivity of southern pine seedlings in response to soil temperature and water availability after planting. New Forests, 30(2–3), 253–272. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11056-005-7481-x
Stebbing, L. (1993). Ellis Horwood series in applied science and industrial technology. 336.
Sutton, B., Attree, S., El-Kassabi, Y., Grossnikle, S., & Polonenko, D. (2004). Commercialization of somatic embryogenesis for plantation forestry. 275–301.
Teskey, R. O., & Will, R. E. (1999). Acclimation of loblolly pine (Pinus taeda) seedlings to high temperatures. Tree Physiology, 19(8), 519–525. https://doi.org/10.1093/treephys/19.8.519
Teskey, R. O., Bongarten, B. C., Cregg, B. M., Dougherty, P. M., & Hennessey, T. C. (1987). Physiology and genetics of tree growth response to moisture and temperature stress: an examination of the characteristics of loblolly pine (Pinus taeda L.). Tree Physiology, 3(1), 41–61. https://doi.org/10.1093/treephys/3.1.41
Tikkinen, M., Varis, S., & Aronen, T. (2018). Development of Somatic Embryo Maturation and Growing Techniques of Norway Spruce Emblings towards Large-Scale Field Testing. Forests, 9(6), 325. https://doi.org/10.3390/f9060325
Teasdale, R. D., Dawson, P. A., & Woolhouse, H. W. (1986). Mineral Nutrient Requirements of a Loblolly Pine (Pinus taeda) Cell Suspension Culture. Plant Physiology, 82(4), 942–945. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.82.4.942
Tinus, R., & Mcdonald, S. (1979). How to grow tree seedlings in containers in greenhouses.
Wakeley, P. (1954). Planting the southern pines. U.S. Department of Agriculture.
Wang, J. Y. (1960). A Critique of the Heat Unit Approach to Plant Response Studies. Ecology, 41(4), 785–790. https://doi.org/10.2307/1931815
The statements, opinions and data contained in the journal are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publisher and the editor(s). We stay neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
