4.5 Article

Germination in five shrub species of Maritime Pine understory-does seed provenance matter?

Journal

ANNALS OF FOREST SCIENCE
Volume 69, Issue 4, Pages 499-507

Publisher

SPRINGER FRANCE
DOI: 10.1007/s13595-012-0206-3

Keywords

Germination; Seed provenance; Maritime Pine ecosystem; Fire-prone shrubs; Cistus ladanifer; Erica australis; Erica umbellata; Genista triacanthos; Pterospartum tridentatum

Categories

Funding

  1. Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology (FCT)
  2. QREN [SFRH/BD/47522/2008, SFRH/BD/42168/2007]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Maritime Pine forests cover important mountain areas in Portugal and are known to be a particularly fire-prone forest type. Understory composition plays an important role in maintaining biodiversity and ecosystem services after recurrent wildfires. This study aims to improve the knowledge on the germination ecology of understory species of Maritime Pine forests, focusing on the importance of seed provenance, including in relation to germination enhancement by heating. The selected species were Cistus ladanifer L., Erica australis L., Erica umbellata L., Pterospartum tridentatum L. (Willk), and Genista triacanthos Brot. Seeds were collected from two or three distant populations. Besides a control treatment, two heating regimes were applied, i.e., 100A degrees C during 5 min and 80A degrees C during 30 min. Heating treatments significantly enhanced germination in four out of the five species. Differences between provenances were most evident for C. ladanifer and E. australis, especially following the heating treatments. Overall, the seeds from the southern provenances germinated better and, at the same time, were smaller. The present results confirmed that seed provenance should not be ignored as a key factor in germination ecology, so that further work is needed to untangle the roles of environmental and genetic factors in the observed differences between provenances.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available