Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Sexual reproduction and crossing barriers in white pines: the case between Pinus lambertiana (sugar pine) and P. monticola (western white pine)

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Tree Genetics & Genomes Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The sexual reproductive process in Pinus lambertiana has not been completely described, and previous attempts to generate hybrids with Pinus monticola and other North American pines have not been successful. The nature of incompatibility barriers between P. lambertiana and P. monticola is unknown. This needs to be understood if strategies are to be developed to overcome the said barriers. In this paper, development on interspecific crosses is compared with that on intraspecific crosses on the same parent trees. Pollen grains of both species germinated on the nucellus of both species within a week after pollination. Seed cone receptivity in P. lambertiana came approximately 2 weeks after receptivity in P. monticola, and this delay was perpetuated throughout ovule development in the first year of the reproductive process. Development of the second-year seed cones proceeded more gradually in P. lambertiana. However, seed cones reached maturity only for P. monticola x P. lambertiana. In both crosses, the barriers to hybridization occurred during the second year of the reproductive process. With the P. lambertiana as the seed parent, it was manifested through the failure of the megaspores at the free-nuclear stage to resume development. When P. monticola was used as the seed parent, the male and female gametes failed to fuse. Our results clearly show that the barriers to hybridization in these species occur before or at fertilization. However, the exact mechanisms behind these are still unknown. Based on the results of this study, we present several strategies to bypass the developmental barriers and possibly produce hybrid progenies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figs. 1-6
Figs. 7-11

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Belcher E, Vozzo JA (1979) Radiographic analysis of agricultural and forest tree seeds (contribution no. 31). In: Handbook on seed testing. The seed X-ray technology committee of the association of official seed analysts, Lansing, MI

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bingham RT, Hoff RJ, Steinhoff RJ (1972) Genetics of western white pine. USDA For Ser Res Pap WO-12. USDA Forest Service, Washington, DC, 28 p

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bruns D, Owens JN (2000) Western white pine (Pinus monticola Dougl.) reproduction: II. Fertilization and cytoplasmic inheritance. Sex Plant Reprod 13:75–84

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Buchholz JT (1944) The cause of sterility in cross-pollinations between certain species in pines. Am J Bot 31(supplement):2–25

    Google Scholar 

  5. Chira E, Berta F (1965) One of the causes of interspecific incompatibility within the genus Pinus. Biologia 20:600–609

    Google Scholar 

  6. Critchfield WB (1966) Crossability and relationships of the closed-cone pines. Silvae Genet 16:89–97

    Google Scholar 

  7. Critchfield WB (1975) Interspecific hybridization in Pinus: a summary review. In: Fowler DP, Yeatman CW (eds) Symposium on interspecific and interprovinance hybridization in forest trees. Proc. 14th Meet. Can. Tree Improv Assoc, Part 2. Fredericton, NB, Canada, pp 99–105

    Google Scholar 

  8. Critchfield WB (1986) Hybridization and classification of the white pines (Pinus Section Strobus). Taxon 35:647–656

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Critchfield WB, Kinloch BB Jr (1986) Sugar pine and its hybrids. Silvae Genet 35:138–144

    Google Scholar 

  10. Critchfield WB, Krugman SL (1967) Crossing the western pines at Placerville, California. Arbor Bull 30:78–81

    Google Scholar 

  11. Duffield JW (1952) Relationships and species hybridizing in the genus Pinus. Z Forstgenet Forstpflanzenzücht 1:93–100

    Google Scholar 

  12. Faure JE, Mogensen HL, Dumas C, Lörz H, Kranz E (1993) Karyogamy after electrofusion of single egg and sperm cell protoplasts from maize: cytological evidence and time course. Plant Cell 5:747–755

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Fernando DD, Owens JN, von Aderkas P, Takaso T (1997) In vitro pollen tube growth and penetration of female gametophyte in Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii). Sex Plant Reprod 10:209–216

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Fernando DD, Owens JN, von Aderkas P (1998) In vitro fertilization from co-cultured pollen tubes and female gametophytes of Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii). Theor Appl Genet 96:1057–1063

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Fernando DD, Owens JN (2004) Development of an in vitro technology for white pine blister rust resistance. In: Sniezko RA, Samman S, Schlarbaum SE, Kriebel HB (eds) Breeding and genetic resources of five-needle pines: growth, adaptability and pest resistance; 2001 July 23–27; Medford, OR, USA. IUFRO Working Party 2.02.15. Proceedings RMRS-P-32. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, CO, pp 163–168

  16. Hagman M (1975) Incompatibility in forest trees. Proc R Soc Lond, B 313:326

    Google Scholar 

  17. Hagman M, Mikkola L (1963) Observations on cross, self-, and interspecific pollinations in Pinus peuce Griseb. Silvae Genet 12:73–79

    Google Scholar 

  18. Hashizume H, Kondo Y (1962a) Studies on the mechanism of fertilization in forest trees. I. Inhibitors to the growth of pollen tubes in the reproductive organs of Pinus densiflora. J Jap For Soc 44:43–48

    Google Scholar 

  19. Hashizume H, Kondo Y (1962b) Studies on the mechanism of fertilization in forest trees. II. Inhibitors to the growth of pollen tubes in the reproductive organs of Pinus thunbergii. Trans Tottori Soc Agr Sci 14:93–97

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Haupt AW (1941) Oogenesis and fertilization in Pinus lambertiana and P. monophylla. Bot Gaz 102:482–498

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Jaffe LA (1976) Fast block to polyspermy in sea urchin eggs is electrically mediated. Nature 261:68–71

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Keng H, Little EL (1961) Needle characteristics of the hybrid pines. Silvae Genet 10:131–146

    Google Scholar 

  23. Kinloch BB Jr (1992) Distribution and frequency of a gene for resistance to white pine blister rust in natural populations of sugar pine. Can J Bot 70:1319–1323

    Google Scholar 

  24. Kinloch BB Jr, Dupper DE (1999) Evidence of cytoplasmic inheritance of virulence in Cronartium ribicola to major gene resistance in sugar pine. Phytopathology 89:192–196

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Kinloch BB Jr, Parks GK, Fowler CW (1970) White pine blister rust: simply inherited resistance in sugar pine. Science 167:193–195

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Kinloch BB Jr, Sniezko RA, Barnes GD, Greathhouse TE (1999) A major gene for resistance to white pine blister rust in western white pine from the western cascade range. Phytopathology 89:861–867

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Kranz E, Bautor J, Lorz H (1991) In vitro fertilization of single, isolated gametes of maize mediated by electrofusion. Sex Plant Reprod 4:12–16

    Google Scholar 

  28. Kranz E, Lorz H (1993) In vitro fertilization with isolated, single gametes results in zygotic embryogenesis and fertilize maize plants. Plant Cell 5:739–746

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Kriebel HB (1967) The timing of the incompatibility reaction of interspecific crosses of Pinus strobus L. Proc 14th IUFRO Cong 3:77–87

    Google Scholar 

  30. Kriebel HB (1972) Embryo development and hybridity barriers in the white pines (Section Strobus). Silvae Genet 21:39–44

    Google Scholar 

  31. Kriebel HB (1981) Maternal control over premature cone abscission of pines. Genetika (Belgrade, Yugoslavia) 10:269–276

    Google Scholar 

  32. Kriebel HB (2004) Genetics and breeding of five-needle pines in the eastern United States. In: Sniezko RA, Samman S, Schlarbaum SE, Kriebel HB (eds) Breeding and genetic resources of five-needle pines: growth, adaptability and pest resistance; 2001 July 23–27; Medford, OR, USA. IUFRO Working Party 2.02.15. Proceedings RMRS-P-32. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, CO, pp 20–27

  33. Kormutak A (1984) Some cytological and biochemical aspects of interspecific incompatibility in pines (Pinus sp.). Acta Dendrobiol 7:7–83

    Google Scholar 

  34. Krugman SL (1970) Incompatibility and inviability systems among some western north American pines. Proceedings of IUFRO Working Group on Sexual Reproduction of Forest Trees, Section 22, 13 pp

  35. McWilliam JR (1959) Interspecific incompatibility in Pinus. Am J Bot 16:425–434

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Owens JN, Bruns D (2000) Western white pine (Pinus monticola Dougl.) reproduction: I. Gametophyte development. Sex Plant Reprod 13:61–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Owens JN, Molder M (1977) Seed-cone differentiation and sexual reproduction in western white pine (Pinus monticola). Can J Bot 55:2574–2590

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Righter FI, Duffield JW (1951) A summary of interspecific crosses in the genus Pinus made at the Institute of Forest Genetics. J Heredity 42:75–80

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Ruzin SE (1999) Plant microtechnique and microscopy. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  40. Samman S, Schwandt JW, Wilson JL (2003) Managing for healthy white pine ecosystems in the United States to reduce the impacts of white pine blister rust. Forest Service Report R1-03-118. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Missoula, MT, 10 p

  41. Sarvas R (1962) Investigations on the flowering and seed crop of Pinus sylvestris. Commun Inst For Fenn 53:1–198

    Google Scholar 

  42. Stockwell WP (1939) Pre-embryonic selection in the pines. J For 37:541–543

    Google Scholar 

  43. Stone EC, Duffield JW (1950) Hybrids of sugar pine embryo culture. J For 48:200–201

    Google Scholar 

  44. Ueda K, Yoshikawa K, Inamori Y (1961) On the fertilization of interspecies crossing in pine. Bull Kyoto Univ For 33:137–155

    Google Scholar 

  45. Whitaker MJ, Swann K (1993) Lighting the fuse at fertilization. Development 117:1–12

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Williams CG, Joyner KL, Aukland LD, Johnston S, Price HJ (2002) Genomic consequences of interspecific Pinus spp. hybridization. Biol J Linn Soc 75:503–508

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Wright JW (1959) Species hybridization in the white pines. For Sci 5:210–222

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful for the assistance given by the Department of Environmental and Forest Biology, State University of New York College of Environmental Science and Forestry through the several work-study undergraduate students who were involved in the sectioning of the specimens. The assistance given by Jeremy Kaufman during the pollination process, by Jerry Berdeen on the seed viability testing, and by other employees at Dorena GRC during all stages of orchard work is gratefully acknowledged.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Environmental and Forest Biology, State University of New York College of Environmental Science and Forestry, 1 Forestry Drive, Syracuse, NY, 13210, USA

    Danilo D. Fernando

  2. Dorena Genetic Resource Center, United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service, 34963 Shoreview Road, Cottage Grove, OR, 97424, USA

    Sally M. Long & Richard A. Sniezko

Authors
  1. Danilo D. Fernando
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sally M. Long
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Richard A. Sniezko
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Danilo D. Fernando.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Fernando, D.D., Long, S.M. & Sniezko, R.A. Sexual reproduction and crossing barriers in white pines: the case between Pinus lambertiana (sugar pine) and P. monticola (western white pine). Tree Genetics & Genomes 1, 143–150 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11295-005-0015-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11295-005-0015-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation