Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-4rdrl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-06T21:21:13.862Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effect of moisture content and prechill duration on dormancy breakage of Douglas fir seeds (Pseudotsuga menziesii var. menziesii [Mirb.] Franco)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 February 2007

Peter G. Gosling ,
Yvonne Samuel  and
Andrew Peace
Peter G. Gosling*
Affiliation:
Silviculture and Seed Research Branch, Forestry Commission Research Agency, Alice Holt Lodge, Farnham, Surrey GU10 4LH, UK
Yvonne Samuel
Affiliation:
Silviculture and Seed Research Branch, Forestry Commission Research Agency, Alice Holt Lodge, Farnham, Surrey GU10 4LH, UK
Andrew Peace
Affiliation:
Silviculture and Seed Research Branch, Forestry Commission Research Agency, Alice Holt Lodge, Farnham, Surrey GU10 4LH, UK
*
*Correspondence Fax: +44 (0)1420 23653, Email: peter.gosling@forestry.gsi.gov.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Seeds of Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii var. menziesii [Mirb.] Franco) were initially germinated at six constant temperatures (10–35°C), following 0–48 weeks incubation under moist conditions at 4°C, i.e. prechill or stratification. The best, single germination temperature was 15°C for determining the efficacy of subsequent dormancy breakage treatments. Seeds from the same seedlot were then adjusted to 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 35 and 40% moisture contents (mcfw, fresh weight basis), prechilled for 0, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64 and 128 weeks and transferred to 15°C. A smoothed bivariate spline was used to model the results and showed that virtually all combinations of moisture content and prechill duration significantly stimulated germination capacity, but that the optimal germination percentage (≥93%) was stimulated only by various combinations of between 30 and 35% mcfw and 25 and 48 weeks prechill. At optimal moisture contents (30 and 35%) , extending the prechill duration beyond 48 weeks led to a decrease in germination capacity. This was not due to dormancy reintroduction, but was caused largely by seed death. Regression models using a weighting function, to account for differences in standard deviations, demonstrated significant increases in the mean moisture content of individual seeds at higher moisture contents (≥25%) and longer prechill durations (≥64 weeks) that were concomitant with significant decreases in dry weight. The most likely explanation for this was seed respiration. The combined results suggest that dormancy breakage in Douglas fir seeds requires a hydration level sufficient for respiration to take place, and that, after maximal dormancy release, seeds at the highest mc (35–40%) exhaust their food reserves and begin to deteriorate.

Keywords

dormancy breakageDouglas firseed moisture contentprechill (stratification) durationPseudotsuga menziesii
Type
Research Article
Information
Seed Science Research , Volume 13 , Issue 3 , September 2003 , pp. 239 - 246
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2003

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Allen, G.S. (1960) Factors affecting the viability and germination behaviour of coniferous seed. IV. Stratification period and incubation temperature. Pseudotsuga menziesii (Mirb.) Franco. Forestry Chronicle 36, 18–29.Google Scholar
Barnett, J.P. (1979) Germination temperatures for container culture of southern pines. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry 3, 13–14.Google Scholar
Barton, L.V. (1930) Hastening the germination of some coniferous seeds. American Journal of Botany 17, 88–117.Google Scholar
Barton, L.V. (1935) Germination of Delphinium seeds. Contributions From Boyce Thomson Institute 7, 405–409.Google Scholar
Baskin, C.C. and Baskin, J.M. (1998) Seeds: Ecology, biogeography, and evolution of dormancy and germination. London, Academic Press.Google Scholar
Bewley, J.D. and Black, M. (1994) Seeds: Physiology of development and germination. 2nd edition. London, Plenum.Google Scholar
Bonner, F.T. (1987) Collection and care of sweetgum seed. New Forests 3, 207–214.Google Scholar
Downie, B., Coleman, J., Scheer, G., Wang, B.S.P., Jensen, M. and Dhir, N. (1998) Alleviation of seed dormancy in white spruce (Picea glauca [Moench.] Voss.) is dependent on the degree of seed hydration. Seed Science and Technology 26, 555–569.Google Scholar
Edwards, D.G.W. (1986) Special prechilling techniques for tree seeds. Journal of Seed Technology 10, 151–171.Google Scholar
Evelyn, J. (1664) A discourse of forest trees and the propagation of timber. [reprinted 1994]. London, Martyn and Allestry.Google Scholar
Favier, J.F. and Woods, J.L. (1993) The quantification of dormancy loss in barley (Hordeum vulgare L.). Seed Science and Technology 21, 653–674.Google Scholar
Foley, M.E. (1994) Temperature and water status of seed affect afterripening in wild oat (Avena fatua). Weed Science 42, 200–204.Google Scholar
Gosling, P.G. (1988) The effect of moist chilling on the subsequent germination of some temperate conifer seeds over a range of temperatures. Journal of Seed Technology 12, 90–98.Google Scholar
Gosling, P.G. and Peace, A.J. (1990) The analysis and interpretation of ISTA ‘double’ germination tests. Seed Science and Technology 18, 791–803.Google Scholar
Gosling, P.G. and Rigg, P. (1990) The effect of moisture content and prechill duration on the efficiency of dormancy breakage in Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis) seed. Seed Science and Technology 18, 337–343.Google Scholar
Gosling, P.G., Jones, S.K. and Gardiner, A.S. (1994) Spin-drying soaked tree seed before prechilling improves seed handling. Tree Planters Notes 45, 32–35.Google Scholar
ISTA (1996) International rules for seed testing. Seed Science and Technology 24.Google Scholar
Jensen, M. (1997) Moisture content controls the effectiveness of dormancy breakage in Abies nordmanniana (Steven) Spach. seeds. pp. 181–190. in Ellis, R.H.;Black, M.;Murdoch, A.J.;Hong, T.D., (Eds) Basic and applied aspects of seed biology. Dordrecht, Kluwer Academic.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, S.K. and Gosling, P.G. (1994) ‘Target moisture content’ prechill overcomes dormancy of temperate conifer seeds. New Forests 8, 309–321.Google Scholar
Leadem, C.L. (1993) Respiration of tree seeds. pp. 57–66. in Edwards, D.G.W. (Ed.) Dormancy and barriers to germination. Proceedings of an international symposium of IUFRO Project Group P2.04–00 (Seed Problems),23–26 April 1991, Victoria, BC, Canada.Google Scholar
Leopold, A.C., Glenister, R. and Cohn, M.A. (1988) Relationship between water content and afterripening in red rice. Physiologia Plantarum 74, 659–662.Google Scholar
McLemore, B.F. and Czabator, F.J. (1961) Length of stratification and germination of loblolly pine seed. Journal of Forestry 58, 267–269.Google Scholar
Mittal, R.K., Wang, B.S.P. and Harmsworth, D. (1987) Effects of extended prechilling on laboratory germination and fungal infection in seeds of white spruce and eastern white pine. Tree Planters Notes 38, 6–9.Google Scholar
Muller, C., Falleri, E., Laroppe, E. and Bonnet-Masimbert, M. (1999) Drying and storage of prechilled Douglas fir, Pseudotsuga menziesii, seeds. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 29, 172–177.Google Scholar
Nikolaieva, M.G. (1967) Physiology of deep dormancy of seeds. pp. 337–345. Borriss, H. (Ed). Physiology, ecology and biochemistry of germination, Vol. 1. 8–14 September 1963.Google Scholar
Poulsen, K.M. (1996) Prolonged cold, moist pretreatment of conifer seeds at controlled moisture content. Seed Science and Technology 24, 75–87.Google Scholar
Roberts, E.H. (1965) Dormancy in rice seeds. IV. Varietal responses to storage and germination temperatures. Journal of Experimental Botany 16, 341–349.Google Scholar
SAS (1990) The G3GRID procedure. Chapter 40, pp. 1311–1330in SAS/GRAPH Software. version 6 (1st edition), Vol. 2. Cary, NC; SAS Institute.Google Scholar
Stokes, P. (1965) Temperature and seed dormancy. Encyclopedia of Plant Physiology 15(2), 746–803.Google Scholar