2000
DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2540.2000.00635.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Differences in genetic structure between two Japanese beech (Fagus crenata Blume) stands

Abstract: Tohoku Regional Breeding Of®ce, Forest Tree Breeding Centre, Takizawa, Iwate 020-0173, Japan and àHokkaido Regional Breeding Of®ce, Forest Tree Breeding Centre, Ebetsu, Hokkaido 069-0836, JapanTo examine the eects of forest cutting on within-population genetic structure, the genetic structure and variability of two Japanese beech (Fagus crenata Blume) stands with contrasting histories in relation to cutting were investigated. Six hundred and sixty beech trees, covering two hectares in total, were mapped and ge… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

3
61
0

Year Published

2002
2002
2011
2011

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 49 publications
(64 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
3
61
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, evidence that silvicultural treatments may modify within-stand genetic structure exists (Rajora, 1999;Rajora et al, 2000). Takahashi et al (2000), comparing primary and recently harvested F. crenata stands, found signs of forest cutting on genetic structure, as less genetic diversity and a considerably higher spatial genetic structure was found in the harvested stand. In a previous work on the effects of management history on genetic diversity in beech stands, Buiteveld et al (2007) found that pairwise comparisons between managed and unmanaged stands revealed no differences in genetic diversity estimates.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…However, evidence that silvicultural treatments may modify within-stand genetic structure exists (Rajora, 1999;Rajora et al, 2000). Takahashi et al (2000), comparing primary and recently harvested F. crenata stands, found signs of forest cutting on genetic structure, as less genetic diversity and a considerably higher spatial genetic structure was found in the harvested stand. In a previous work on the effects of management history on genetic diversity in beech stands, Buiteveld et al (2007) found that pairwise comparisons between managed and unmanaged stands revealed no differences in genetic diversity estimates.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, to date the comparison of contemporary gene flow rates between managed and unmanaged forest tree stands is almost unexplored (Robledo-Arnuncio et al, 2004). Silvicultural treatments may modify the amount of genetic variability and the spatial genetic structure within a stand (Rajora, 1999;Rajora et al, 2000;Takahashi et al, 2000), suggesting possible changes in gene flow patterns within and among stands. These results were usually obtained by monitoring the levels and spatial distribution of genetic variability.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Strong structuring has also been detected using spatial autocorrelation in a population in which vegetative reproduction and limited dispersal of pollen and seeds were observed (Shapcott, 1995). It has also revealed striking differences in genetic structure between populations with differing histories of anthropogenic disturbance (Knowles et al, 1992;Takahashi et al, 2000).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 83%
“…The use of neutral molecular markers to make inferences regarding adaptive processes is risky, unless natural selection is still in place or there is a strong connection between the selected loci and the neutral markers (Merzeau et al, 1994;Leonardi and Menozzi, 1996;Takahashi et al, 2000;Mariette et al, 2002). The AFLPs revealed a genetic distance (Nei, 1978) of 0.148 between samples of the two areas (Table 1).…”
Section: Genetic Structurementioning
confidence: 99%