Genetically Appropriate Choices for Plant Materials to Maintain Biological Diversity <ul><li>Arlee M. Montalvo </li></ul><...
Acknowledgements  Andy Kratz, Norman Ellstrand, Sue Mazer, Mary Mahalovich, Gay Austin, Len Nunney, Nick Waser, Laura Gall...
For Genetics Part of Ecological Restoration Goal, What Matters? <ul><li>Preserving processes and all levels of biodiversit...
Species Selection  Source Selection <ul><li>Choice of plant species and project goals are of vital importance  </li></ul><...
Factors to Consider in Selection of Sources <ul><ul><li>• Goals and implications of restoration project  </li></ul></ul><u...
Steps for informing choices (Rogers and Montalvo 2004) Identify project objective Determine project context Is natural reg...
Steps for informing choices (Rogers and Montalvo 2004) 1. Identify project objective 2. Determine project context Is natur...
<ul><li>1. Is a major goal the maintenance of native plant species to support natural levels of biodiversity? </li></ul><u...
<ul><li>Spatial Context, Scale, and Connectivity of Sites  </li></ul><ul><li>introduced genotypes to go into striped areas...
Consider Landscape Scale Strategies at all Steps  Prevailing Wind during bloom period Plant propagule source reserves Plan...
Bailey’s System: ww.fs.fed.us/colormap/ecoreg1_provinces 200 Humid Temperate Domain 220 Hot Continental Division 221 Easte...
 
www.epa.gov/wed/pages/ecoregions/level_iii.htm 84: Atlantic Coastal Pine Barrens 50: Northern Lakes and Forests 58: Northe...
Steps for informing choices (Rogers and Montalvo 2004) Identify project objective Determine project context 3. Is natural ...
After Disturbance, Always Consider Extent of Natural Regeneration <ul><li>Soil seed bank </li></ul><ul><li>Canopy seed ban...
Steps for informing choices (Rogers and Montalvo 2004) Identify project objective Determine project context Is natural reg...
Steps for informing choices (Rogers and Montalvo 2004) Identify project objective Determine project context Is natural reg...
What is a seed transfer seed zone? <ul><li>An area with defined boundaries and altitudinal limits often based on soil, cli...
Late 1930’s – First seed zone maps <ul><li>Geographic and climatic data were used to define ‘unique’ regions in the Pacifi...
www.epa.gov/wed/pages/ecoregions/level_iii.htm Level III units can be further subdivided based on details of soil, elevati...
 
USDA Hardiness Zones
Foresters began creating a system for species-specific seed transfer long ago <ul><li>Long-term provenance trials in the U...
Nassella pulchra,  purple needlegrass Basic model: V P  = V G  + V E in common garden: V P  ~= V G   Elymus glaucus Tradit...
Foresters grew seed sources from diverse areas (provenances) in several common environments
Long-term provenance trials provided evidence of the problems that could occur when using the wrong seed source A 1955 col...
Researchers determine which environmental and climatic variables from the seed source locations correlate with traits meas...
Seed-collection zones for  Pinus   echinata , shortleaf pine  (Wells 1979) See Guide, pp 120-121 for ponderosa pine
Pinus echinata , shortleaf pine <ul><li>Wide geographic range– in 22 states </li></ul><ul><li>Southeastern NY and NJ to PA...
Improve Seed Transfer Guidelines with Genetic Data <ul><li>Data on adaptive differences </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Performance ...
Common garden tests showed continuous (clinal) variation with elevation and latitude in  morphology and important ecologic...
Geographic Patterns in  Liriodendron tulipifera <ul><li>Patterns suggest </li></ul><ul><li>post Pleistocene differentiatio...
Also Consider Performance of Hybrids
Steps for informing choices (Rogers and Montalvo 2004) Identify project objective Determine project context Is natural reg...
Life History Traits
 
 
Steps for informing choices (Rogers and Montalvo 2004) Identify project objective Determine project context Is natural reg...
Choice of Plant Materials and Effects of Mixing Populations <ul><li>Beneficial Effects </li></ul><ul><li>Genetic rescue </...
Is There Data on Target Species or on Species with Similar Traits? <ul><li>Do outstanding genetic differences among popula...
Low structure correlates with high gene dispersal and consequently high similarity of populations (but with isolation by d...
Effect of Crossing Distance on F 1  Fitness for 66 Studies Comparing Crosses Within and Among Populations 55% of studies s...
Other Methods are Being Devised to Assist in Making Choices <ul><li>A ‘Rapid Assessment’ method (Johnson and Roy) is being...
Bart Johnson and Bitty Roy (2006 in prep.) Genetic Effects Rapid Assessment Matrix   To identify potential undesirable out...
Genetic Effects Rapid Assessment Matrix Codes: DP = Distance problematic  DLP = Distance less problematic NP = Distance no...
Genetic Effects Rapid Assessment Matrix Codes: DP = Distance problematic  DLP = Distance less problematic NP = Distance no...
Genetic Effects Rapid Assessment Matrix Codes: DP = Distance problematic  DLP = Distance less problematic NP = Distance no...
Genetically Local? <ul><li>“Plant materials that reflect the amount and type of genetic diversity that is typical for a pa...
Steps for informing choices (Rogers and Montalvo 2004) Identify project objective Determine project context Is natural reg...
 
Challenges for using evolutionary-based, ecological restoration to maintain biodiversity <ul><li>When in doubt, play it sa...
Native Cultivars: Considerations <ul><li>Why and how was the material produced? </li></ul><ul><li>What are the main issues...
Ends Along a Continuum: Source adapted or general purpose? <ul><li>Narrowly adapted ecotypes or accessions: </li></ul><ul>...
Knowledge of Plant Material Releases <ul><li>Initial sampling and collection methods?  </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Diversity in ...
Knowledge of Plant Material Releases <ul><li>Unintentional selection potential (generation no.)? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Los...
Consider Landscape Context of Project  <ul><ul><li>How can managers mitigate unknown risks? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Con...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Nuts & Bolts: Genetically Appropriate Choices for Plant Materials to Maintain Biological Diversity

1,595

Published on

Dr. Arlee Montavalo, University of California, Riverside
Symposium:
What is Local? Genetics & Plant Selection in the Urban Context. (Tuesday, May 23, 2006, American Museum of Natural History)

Published in: Business, Technology
0 Comments
2 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
1,595
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
2
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Nuts & Bolts: Genetically Appropriate Choices for Plant Materials to Maintain Biological Diversity

    1. 1. Genetically Appropriate Choices for Plant Materials to Maintain Biological Diversity <ul><li>Arlee M. Montalvo </li></ul><ul><li>Department of Botany and Plant Sciences, University of California, Riverside </li></ul><ul><li>and </li></ul><ul><li>Riverside-Corona Resource Conservation District </li></ul>
    2. 2. Acknowledgements Andy Kratz, Norman Ellstrand, Sue Mazer, Mary Mahalovich, Gay Austin, Len Nunney, Nick Waser, Laura Galloway, Ruth Shaw, Vicky Erickson, Steve Monsen, Randy Johnson, Patrick McGuire, a bunch of reviewers and many others, especially co-author Deborah Rogers. The USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region provided funding and logistical support for “the Guide”: <ul><li>To find “THE GUIDE” </li></ul><ul><li>Rogers, D.L. and A.M. Montalvo. 2004. Genetically appropriate choices for plant materials to maintain biological diversity. University of California. Report to the USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region, Lakewood, CO. Online: </li></ul><ul><li>http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/publications/botany/plantgenetics.pdf </li></ul>
    3. 3. For Genetics Part of Ecological Restoration Goal, What Matters? <ul><li>Preserving processes and all levels of biodiversity </li></ul><ul><li>Providing potential for future survival and evolution </li></ul><ul><li>Looking at how the site fits into surrounding landscape </li></ul><ul><li>Dispersal linkages among fragmented populations </li></ul><ul><li>Looking backwards and ahead </li></ul><ul><li>Preserving species interactions </li></ul><ul><li>Minimizing detrimental species/population introductions </li></ul><ul><li>Avoiding problematic cascading effects </li></ul><ul><li>Avoiding inbreeding and outbreeding depression </li></ul><ul><li>Protecting genetic reserves and research potential </li></ul><ul><li>Plant material availability, cost, logistics </li></ul>
    4. 4. Species Selection Source Selection <ul><li>Choice of plant species and project goals are of vital importance </li></ul><ul><li>This talk focuses on steps that follow those important first steps </li></ul><ul><li>Here, the focus is on diversity within species and choosing source populations </li></ul><ul><li>Sometimes, looking deeper will lead to revision of species choices -- or goals </li></ul>
    5. 5. Factors to Consider in Selection of Sources <ul><ul><li>• Goals and implications of restoration project </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>• Habitat and population conditions </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Species characteristics-- life-history, mating system </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Population characteristics </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>• Landscape ecological relation of donor and recipient sites </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>• Collection and propagation protocols (see Guide chapt. 8) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>• Genetic status of donor and recipient populations </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>• Population or species knowledge </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>• Project parameters, including logistics and funding </li></ul></ul>
    6. 6. Steps for informing choices (Rogers and Montalvo 2004) Identify project objective Determine project context Is natural regeneration sufficient to render introductions unnecessary? Is the species threatened or endangered? Are there seed transfer rules? Is the species clonal? Is there evidence of genetic differentiation or local adaptation? Is the species polyploid? What is the main breeding system? Mating system? Is there evidence of inbreeding or outbreeding depression? Site considerations Address selection of plant introduction stock Address whether or not to introduce plants Slide modified from Johnson & Roy 2006
    7. 7. Steps for informing choices (Rogers and Montalvo 2004) 1. Identify project objective 2. Determine project context Is natural regeneration sufficient to render introductions unnecessary? Is the species a state or federally listed species? Are there seed transfer rules? Is the species clonal? Is there evidence of genetic differentiation or local adaptation? Is the species polyploid? What is the main breeding system? Mating system? Is there evidence of inbreeding or outbreeding depression? Site considerations
    8. 8. <ul><li>1. Is a major goal the maintenance of native plant species to support natural levels of biodiversity? </li></ul><ul><li>Yes– proceed to step 3 (is natural regeneration sufficient?) </li></ul><ul><li>No– proceed to step 2 </li></ul><ul><li>2. Is the project isolated from areas with similar biodiversity goal? </li></ul><ul><li>Yes– proceed with discretion and use genetically appropriate materials as much as possible </li></ul><ul><li>No– proceed to next step 3 (is natural regeneration sufficient?) </li></ul>
    9. 9. <ul><li>Spatial Context, Scale, and Connectivity of Sites </li></ul><ul><li>introduced genotypes to go into striped areas </li></ul><ul><li>dotted or graded areas are part or all of species distribution </li></ul>A B D C
    10. 10. Consider Landscape Scale Strategies at all Steps Prevailing Wind during bloom period Plant propagule source reserves Planting in buffer zones of reserve (encourage use of reserve propagules) River flow direction Restoration site Restoration site Big hills Slide modified from Johnson & Roy 2006
    11. 11. Bailey’s System: ww.fs.fed.us/colormap/ecoreg1_provinces 200 Humid Temperate Domain 220 Hot Continental Division 221 Eastern Broadleaf Forest (Oceanic) Province
    12. 13. www.epa.gov/wed/pages/ecoregions/level_iii.htm 84: Atlantic Coastal Pine Barrens 50: Northern Lakes and Forests 58: Northeastern Highlands 64: Northern Piedmont
    13. 14. Steps for informing choices (Rogers and Montalvo 2004) Identify project objective Determine project context 3. Is natural regeneration sufficient to render introductions unnecessary? Is the species threatened or endangered? Are there seed transfer rules? Is the species clonal? Is there evidence of genetic differentiation or local adaptation? Is the species polyploid? What is the main breeding system? Mating system? Is there evidence of inbreeding or outbreeding depression? Site considerations
    14. 15. After Disturbance, Always Consider Extent of Natural Regeneration <ul><li>Soil seed bank </li></ul><ul><li>Canopy seed bank </li></ul><ul><li>Corms, bulbs and other propagules </li></ul><ul><li>Resprouting from stumps, roots, rhizomes </li></ul><ul><li>Natural seed rain </li></ul><ul><li>Also consider ability of particularly bad invasive species to take hold first </li></ul>
    15. 16. Steps for informing choices (Rogers and Montalvo 2004) Identify project objective Determine project context Is natural regeneration sufficient to render introductions unnecessary? Is the species a state or federally listed species? Are there seed transfer rules? Is the species clonal? Is there evidence of genetic differentiation or local adaptation? Is the species polyploid? What is the main breeding system? Mating system? Is there evidence of inbreeding or outbreeding depression? Site considerations
    16. 17. Steps for informing choices (Rogers and Montalvo 2004) Identify project objective Determine project context Is natural regeneration sufficient to render introductions unnecessary? Is the species threatened or endangered? Are there seed transfer rules? Is the species clonal? Is there evidence of genetic differentiation or local adaptation? Is the species polyploid? What is the main breeding system? Mating system? Is there evidence of inbreeding or outbreeding depression? Site considerations
    17. 18. What is a seed transfer seed zone? <ul><li>An area with defined boundaries and altitudinal limits often based on soil, climate and geography, within which seed (plant material) can be moved with minimal risk of maladaptation </li></ul><ul><li>Can improve on concept </li></ul><ul><li>“ Geographical regions within which individuals of native species can be transferred with no detrimental effects on population mean fitness” </li></ul><ul><li>(Hufford & Mazer 2003) </li></ul>
    18. 19. Late 1930’s – First seed zone maps <ul><li>Geographic and climatic data were used to define ‘unique’ regions in the Pacific Northwest </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Assumed plants affected by climatic variables </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Grouped areas with similar climate and vegetation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>One map for all tree species </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Can and have improved on this </li></ul>
    19. 20. www.epa.gov/wed/pages/ecoregions/level_iii.htm Level III units can be further subdivided based on details of soil, elevation, evapotranspiration, and vegetation
    20. 22. USDA Hardiness Zones
    21. 23. Foresters began creating a system for species-specific seed transfer long ago <ul><li>Long-term provenance trials in the US were established as early as 1911. Such reciprocal transplant trials have revealed genetic differences </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Morphology </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Physiology </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Phenology </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Fitness traits </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Takes a long time </li></ul><ul><li>Not many around </li></ul><ul><li>Mostly conifers </li></ul>
    22. 24. Nassella pulchra, purple needlegrass Basic model: V P = V G + V E in common garden: V P ~= V G Elymus glaucus Traditional Common Garden Studies (Knapp & Rice; Erickson & Sorenson)
    23. 25. Foresters grew seed sources from diverse areas (provenances) in several common environments
    24. 26. Long-term provenance trials provided evidence of the problems that could occur when using the wrong seed source A 1955 cold snap in early November led to the decline of off-site Douglas-fir provenances in a trial established in 1915 It’s the rare climatic events that tend to show maladaptation in long-lived trees
    25. 27. Researchers determine which environmental and climatic variables from the seed source locations correlate with traits measured in the study plots example of stepped cline in ponderosa pine (Sorensen and others 2001 ) Data provided by G Randy Johnson, USFS Data often show geographic patterns in morphology and fitness-related traits
    26. 28. Seed-collection zones for Pinus echinata , shortleaf pine (Wells 1979) See Guide, pp 120-121 for ponderosa pine
    27. 29. Pinus echinata , shortleaf pine <ul><li>Wide geographic range– in 22 states </li></ul><ul><li>Southeastern NY and NJ to PA, s. to n. FL </li></ul><ul><li>Temp. extremes: -22 o F in NJ to 112 o F in LA </li></ul><ul><li>Wind pollinated </li></ul><ul><li>Wind dispersed seeds, avg. 250 feet, max ¼ mi. </li></ul><ul><li>Geographic cline in pollen size </li></ul><ul><li>Genetic studies done after initial seed zones made </li></ul>
    28. 30. Improve Seed Transfer Guidelines with Genetic Data <ul><li>Data on adaptive differences </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Performance data from reciprocal transplant and common garden studies </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Patterning in plant traits and correspondence to environmental patterns </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Data on more neutral genetic differences </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Patterns in molecular genetic data that indicate aspects of gene flow and history of populations </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Geographic patterns in molecular data (phylogeography) </li></ul></ul>
    29. 31. Common garden tests showed continuous (clinal) variation with elevation and latitude in morphology and important ecological variable such as disease resistance, length of growing season, response to day length, and dormancy.
    30. 32. Geographic Patterns in Liriodendron tulipifera <ul><li>Patterns suggest </li></ul><ul><li>post Pleistocene differentiation following dispersal from single glacial refugium </li></ul><ul><li>recontact and hybridization in sympatry </li></ul><ul><li>Similar patterns proposed for several conifer species following detailed phylogeographic work </li></ul>
    31. 33. Also Consider Performance of Hybrids
    32. 34. Steps for informing choices (Rogers and Montalvo 2004) Identify project objective Determine project context Is natural regeneration sufficient to render introductions unnecessary? Is the species threatened or endangered? Are there seed transfer rules? Is the species clonal? Is there evidence of genetic differentiation or local adaptation? Is the species polyploid? What is the main breeding system? Mating system? Is there evidence of inbreeding or outbreeding depression? Site considerations
    33. 35. Life History Traits
    34. 38. Steps for informing choices (Rogers and Montalvo 2004) Identify project objective Determine project context Is natural regeneration sufficient to render introductions unnecessary? Is the species a state or federally listed species? Are there seed transfer rules? Is the species clonal? Is there evidence of genetic differentiation or local adaptation? Is the species polyploid? What is the main breeding system? Mating system? Is there evidence of inbreeding or outbreeding depression? Site considerations
    35. 39. Choice of Plant Materials and Effects of Mixing Populations <ul><li>Beneficial Effects </li></ul><ul><li>Genetic rescue </li></ul><ul><li>Introgression of new beneficial genetic combinations </li></ul><ul><li>Possible heterosis </li></ul><ul><li>Adverse Effects </li></ul><ul><li>Mating incompatibilities </li></ul><ul><li>Dilution of adaptation </li></ul><ul><li>Hybrid breakdown and lower fitness for multiple generations </li></ul><ul><li>Swamping </li></ul>Likelihood of effects depends on magnitude of genetic differentiation, life histories, particular genetic architectures of source and recipient populations, site conditions
    36. 40. Is There Data on Target Species or on Species with Similar Traits? <ul><li>Do outstanding genetic differences among populations influence their survival and reproduction in different environments? </li></ul><ul><li>Have recipient and source populations been isolated for a very long time? </li></ul><ul><li>Are actual or potential genetic differences among populations large enough to decrease success of mating and hybrid offspring? </li></ul>
    37. 41. Low structure correlates with high gene dispersal and consequently high similarity of populations (but with isolation by distance)
    38. 42. Effect of Crossing Distance on F 1 Fitness for 66 Studies Comparing Crosses Within and Among Populations 55% of studies showed lower fitness of hybrids than parents (OBD). 32% showed heterosis. 14% showed no effect of crossing distance. 96% of 49 studies tested for and found inbreeding depression. table built in 2001-- can add more data now-- including for > 1 generation-- eventually can test for expected patterns with life-history
    39. 43. Other Methods are Being Devised to Assist in Making Choices <ul><li>A ‘Rapid Assessment’ method (Johnson and Roy) is being devised that may prove useful </li></ul><ul><li>Uses data and generalizations </li></ul><ul><li>Must recognize limitations and course nature of generalizations based on life history </li></ul><ul><li>Some regions are amassing data and looking at patterns in many plant species for defined area </li></ul><ul><li>See Native Seed Network web site </li></ul>
    40. 44. Bart Johnson and Bitty Roy (2006 in prep.) Genetic Effects Rapid Assessment Matrix To identify potential undesirable outcomes from introduction of off-site plant stock <ul><li>Matrix logic: all else being equal, effects of increasing distance* of propagule source from introduction site are such that: </li></ul><ul><li>a) Distance is less likely to be a problem for success on site for outcrossers than for selfers </li></ul><ul><li>b) Distance is less likely to lead to undesirable genetic effects on site or nearby for selfers than for outcrossers </li></ul><ul><li>c) The consequences of undesirable genetic effects on site or nearby are greater for sensitive species and those which are more likely to hybridize </li></ul><ul><li>d) Species with small populations relative to the introduction are more vulnerable to genetic swamping and genetic load. </li></ul><ul><li>e) When the species is not extant on site or nearby, the issue of undesired genetic effects is minimal for the initial introduction </li></ul>* To extent possible distinguish between physical distance, environmental distance and effective dispersal distance
    41. 45. Genetic Effects Rapid Assessment Matrix Codes: DP = Distance problematic DLP = Distance less problematic NP = Distance not problematic -- or ++  lesser or greater likelihood for problems Matrix tracks two issues: success on site and potential for undesirable genetic effects Slide modified from Johnson & Roy 2006
    42. 46. Genetic Effects Rapid Assessment Matrix Codes: DP = Distance problematic DLP = Distance less problematic NP = Distance not problematic -- or ++  lesser or greater likelihood for problems Elymus glaucus Slide modified from Johnson & Roy 2006
    43. 47. Genetic Effects Rapid Assessment Matrix Codes: DP = Distance problematic DLP = Distance less problematic NP = Distance not problematic -- or ++  lesser or greater likelihood for problems Roemer’s Fescue Slide modified from Johnson & Roy 2006
    44. 48. Genetically Local? <ul><li>“Plant materials that reflect the amount and type of genetic diversity that is typical for a particular plant species in the area under consideration” </li></ul><ul><li>Physical distances and risks are variable </li></ul><ul><li>Can also consider effects on other species </li></ul><ul><li>Area associated with minimal risk of extinction </li></ul>
    45. 49. Steps for informing choices (Rogers and Montalvo 2004) Identify project objective Determine project context Is natural regeneration sufficient to render introductions unnecessary? Is the species a state or federally listed species? Are there seed transfer rules? Is the species clonal? Is there evidence of genetic differentiation or local adaptation? Is the species polyploid? What is the main breeding system? Mating system? Is there evidence of inbreeding or outbreeding depression? Site considerations
    46. 51. Challenges for using evolutionary-based, ecological restoration to maintain biodiversity <ul><li>When in doubt, play it safe………. </li></ul><ul><li>There are potential benefits and risks from broad-scale mixing of genotypes, but lower risks with local-scale mixing </li></ul><ul><li>For drastically altered sites and population fragmentation, in the face of extirpations, looming climate change, and economic constraints, it may seem desirable to do broad-scale mixing of genetic materials and “let natural selection sort it out” </li></ul><ul><li>• Keep in mind: choices made in the face of limited knowledge or funding can be risky and result in long-term consequences </li></ul><ul><li>Choosing genetically local sources may maintain multiple levels of genetic diversity from genes to populations to communities and ecosystems. </li></ul><ul><li>Managed gene flow will require looking at historical patterns and future projections </li></ul>
    47. 52. Native Cultivars: Considerations <ul><li>Why and how was the material produced? </li></ul><ul><li>What are the main issues? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Agricultural vs ecological goal </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Genetic erosion, genetic diversity, hybridization </li></ul></ul><ul><li>How can cultivars be used responsibly? </li></ul><ul><li>What should you know about the cultivars you consider for use in restoration? </li></ul><ul><li>See chapter 8 of guide……and Aubry, Shoal, and Erickson (2004) </li></ul>
    48. 53. Ends Along a Continuum: Source adapted or general purpose? <ul><li>Narrowly adapted ecotypes or accessions: </li></ul><ul><li>maximize GxE </li></ul><ul><li>retain coadapted gene complexes </li></ul><ul><li>preserve complex species interactions </li></ul><ul><li>inbreeding depression risk if too narrow </li></ul><ul><li>Broadly adapted cultivars: </li></ul><ul><li>minimize GxE </li></ul><ul><li>agricultural trait syndrome </li></ul><ul><li>ignore coadaptation & interactions </li></ul><ul><li>outbreeding depression risk </li></ul>Modified from Chris Richards
    49. 54. Knowledge of Plant Material Releases <ul><li>Initial sampling and collection methods? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Diversity in collections? Inbreeding avoidance? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Sampling modified for mating system? Clonality? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Selection of phenotypes? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Produced with agricultural or ecological goal? </li></ul><ul><li>Was there intentional selection of genotypes? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Broadest ecological tolerance and lowest G x E? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Highest growth rate? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Palatable forage or digestibility by sheep or cattle? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Heavy metal tolerance? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Selection of phenotypes may result in unforeseen tradeoffs (e.g., disease resistance, drought tolerance) </li></ul>
    50. 55. Knowledge of Plant Material Releases <ul><li>Unintentional selection potential (generation no.)? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Loss of seed dormancy and seed shattering </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Narrowing of or shift in flowering time </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Loss of genetic variance </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Is genetic diversity of accession narrow? </li></ul><ul><li>Is genetic diversity broadened by mixing accessions? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Did seed zone research guide mixtures? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Recognition of species interactions? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>If goal is F1 heterosis, was hybrid breakdown or environmental dependence studied? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Cross contamination during grow out? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Did isolation distance recognize variation in mating system? </li></ul></ul>
    51. 56. Consider Landscape Context of Project <ul><ul><li>How can managers mitigate unknown risks? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Consider the context of planting project </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>urban </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>rural-agriculture, little native vegetation </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>leapfrogs wild and developed habitats </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>urban-wildland interface </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>wildlands (heterogeneous vs homogeneous) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>proximity to research and germplasm reserves </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>proximity to related rare species </li></ul></ul></ul>

    ×