|Chairman||R. Morandini||Istituto Sperimentale per la Selvicoltura|
52100 Arezzo, Italy
|Vice-Chairman||M. Hagman||Forest Research Institute|
Forest Tree Breeding Station
|Members||W.H.G. Barrett||Fiplasto Forestal S.A.|
Maipu 942 - Piso 21
Buenos Aires, Argentina
|W.G. Dyson 1||East African Agriculture and Forestry Research Organization|
P.O. Box 30148
|R.C. Ghosh||Forest Research Institute and Colleges|
Dehra Dun, India
|M.J. Groulez||Centre Technique Forestier Tropical|
45 bis Avenue de la Belle Gabrielle
Nogent-sur-Marne (Seine), France
|P. Hoekstra||Division of Cooperative Forestry|
Washington D.C. 20250, U.S.A.
|D.E. Iyamabo||Agricultural Research Council of Nigeria|
|Danish/FAO Forest Tree Seed Centre|
DK- 3050 Humlebaek, Denmark
|R.H. Kemp||Commonwealth Forestry Institute|
Oxford OX1 3RB, United Kingdom
|J.W. Turnbull||Department of Forestry|
Australian National University
P.O. Box 4
Canberra A.C.T. 2600, Australia
|Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Forestales|
Av. Progreso 5
Coyoacan 21 D.F., Mexico
|Secretariat||c/o Forest Management Branch, FAO|
Viale delle Terme di Caracalla
1 Present address: CATIE, Turrialba, Costa Rica.
FAO PANEL OF EXPERTS ON FOREST GENE RESOURCES
Canberra 9 – 11 March 1977
Adoption of agenda
Progress since 3rd session of Panel (May 1974)
Other international activities
Review of the Global Programme on Forest Genetic Resources
Synthesis of the global programme - operational and geographical balance
Proposals for FAO Regular Programme 1978/79
Proposals for FAO/UNEP follow-up project on Conservation of Forest Genetic Resources
Proposals for other projects
May 1974 – March 1977
South Coast and Blue Mountains, N.S.W. - 1974
Small seed collections, totalling 0.5 kg, were made from each of the following species - E. deformis, E. elata, E. eximia, E. gummifera, E. mannifera, ssp. maculosa, E. piperita, E. sclerophylla, E. stenostoma and E. tenella.
South Coast, N.S.W. - 1974
A total of 3.2 kg of seed was collected from 3 provenances of E. maidenii, 1 provenance of E. maculata, 1 provenance of E. cypellocarpa and 3 provenances of the E. botryoides/saligna complex.
East Gippsland, Victoria - 1975
A trip of 12 days duration resulted in the collection of 2 provenances of E. delegatensis, 1 provenance of E. globulus ssp. bicostata, 4 provenances of E. viminalis and 1 provenance of E. elata. The total seed weight obtained was 7.8 kg.
Irian Jaya, Indonesia - 1975
A special trip involving forestry personnel from Australia, Papua New Guinea, and Indonesia was made to Irian Jaya in June 1975. Despite difficult conditions, small research collections were obtained of E. deglupta and Araucaria cunninghamii. In accordance with an earlier agreement, half of the seed stayed with the Indonesian Department of Forestry, while the remainder was divided equally between the Papua New Guinea Department of Forests and the CSIRO Division of Forest Research. It was unfortunate that the seed leaving Indonesia was almost completely killed by over zealous fumigation. The seed remaining in Indonesia is believed to be viable. The trip did provide useful information on the extent of E. deglupta and Araucaria cunninghamii in Irian Jaya. A detailed account has been published in ‘Forest Genetic Resources Information’ No.6.
Lake Albacutya, Victoria - 1975
The consistent high demand for E. camaldulensis seed from Lake Albacutya necessitated another trip to the area in October 1975. A 5 tree collection was made at Lake Albacutya and an 8 tree collection at Lake Agnes which is some 30 km to the north at the extremity of the same flood plain system. A small seed collection of E. largiflorens was also made near Lake Albacutya. The total weight of seed was 5.2 kg.
Coen and Atherton Areas, north Queensland - 1975
A total of 156.5 kg of Araucaria cunninghamii seed from 17 trees was collected in the Coen area of north Queensland. In addition, 6.1 kg of eucalypt seed was obtained in the Atherton area. The eucalypt collection comprised E. tereticornis, E. pellita, E. camaldulensis, E. cloeziana and E. torelliana.
Eastern Queensland - 1976
Two trips of a total of seven weeks duration were made between August – October 1976 principally to explore and sample the entire natural distribution of E. cloeziana. The species has a very disjunct distribution pattern between Gympie (26°S) and Cooktown (15°S). A total of 29 kg of seed was collected from 163 trees in 20 localities. New and potentially important stands were located. Small collections of E. saligna, E. sphaerocarpa, E. phaeotricha were also made.
Gippsland, Victoria - 1976
A field trip encompassing both east and west Gippsland resulted in seed collections of 4 provenances of E. nitens, and 1 provenance each of E. botryoides, E. delegatensis, E. fastigata, E. glaucescens and E. sieberi. The total weight of seed was 7.1 kg.
South Coast of N.S.W. - 1976
A total of 19.2 kg of seed was obtained from 5 provenances of E. maidenii, 3 provenances of E. sieberi, 1 provenance of E. pilularis, 1 provenance of E. botryoides, 1 provenance of E. botryoides/saligna complex, 1 provenance of E. maculata, 1 provenance of E. paniculata and 1 provenance of E. smithii.
Katherine, N.T.; Petford and Mt Garnet, north Queensland - 1977
A field trip of approximately three weeks duration was made in January 1977, under a special UNEP/FAO grant for seed collections of provenances considered to be important for purposes of establishing ex-situ conservation/selection stands.
The expedition proved to be a highly successful one, returning with a 40 tree collection of E. camaldulensis from the Katherine area, a 49 tree collection of E. camaldulensis from the Petford area and a 29 tree collection of E. tereticornis from southwest of Mt Garnet. The total weight of seed collected was 41.5 kg.
Bendoc, Victoria - 1977
A total of 3.1 kg of seed of E. nitens was collected from 8 trees in a brief, 3-day field trip.
Local Field Trips
Many one- or two-day field trips were made during the period. A total of 22 kg of eucalypt seed of some 30 species was collected which included such species as E. globulus ssp. bicostata, E. viminalis, E. nitens, E. dalrympleana and E. macarthuri.
|Lot No.||Location||Quantity of seeds|
|353||Valle de Bravo, Mexico||1.300|
|367||Lagunas de Monte Bello, Chis.||1.900|
|376||Ario de Rosales, Mich.||0.900|
|379||La Tzararacua, Mich.||1.900|
|392||Palos Altos, Jal.||1.100|
|398||Valle de Bravo, Mex.||2.600|
|399||El Llano, Zitacuaro - Susupuato, Mich.||2.100|
|420||San Angel, Mich.||0.330|
|422||Los Arroyos, Mich.||0.620|
|423||La Loma Uruapan - Apatzingan, Mich.||0.480|
|481||Matanguaran y La Tzararacua, Mich.||1.800|
|485||La Huacan y Ario de Rosales, Mich.||1.100|
|450||Ario de Rosales, Mich.||1.100|
|534||La Codicia, Ocosingo, Chis.||5.200|
|535||La Florida, Ocosingo, Chis.||1.300|
|-||Buenavista Chilpancingo, Gro. 740 msnm||being processed|
|-||Chinameca, Tianguistengo, Hgo.||" "|
|-||Comalapa Imaltenango de la Frontera||" "|
|-||Tiltepec, Mpio. de Jiquipilas||" "|
|-||Nuevo Mexico||" "|
|-||Carr. Escopetazo - Pichucalco Km. 71 (Jitotol)||" "|
|-||Tzutzben (Larrainzar)||" "|
|-||Carr. San Cristobal - Zontehuitz||" "|
|-||Cienega de León||" "|
|-||Vista Hermosa (Cintalapa)||" "|
|-||Escopetazo - Pichucalco||" "|
|-||Escopetazo - Pichucalco (cerca de Soyaló)||" "|
|-||Pueblo Nuevo - Solistahuacan||" "|
|-||Carr. Cate San Juan del Bosque||" "|
|-||Carr. Rancho Nuevo - Yajalon||" "|
|-||Altamirano (alrededor)||" "|
|-||Trinitaria Montebello||" "|
|-||Laguna El Vergel||" "|
|-||San Francisco (margaritas)||" "|
|-||Coapilla - Ocotepec||" "|
|Lot No.||Location||Quantity of seeds|
|402||Zacualtipan, Hgo. desv. a Tianquistengo||2.300|
|464||La Venta, D.F.||2.000|
|510||La Venta, D.F.||1.950|
|-||Jacala, Hgo.||being processed|
|-||Zacatlan, Puebla.||" "|
Map 1 - LOCATIONS OF SEED COLLECTIONS OF PINUS OOCARPA IN THE STATE OF CHIAPAS
Map 2 - LOCATIONS OF SEEDS COLLECTIONS OF PINUS OOCARPA IN MEXICO
▲ Seed lots collected
□ Seed lots to be collected in season 1976–77
|A. SEED PROCUREMENT|
|1.||F.R.I. and C.S.I.R.O. Canberra(Eucalypts, Araucaria, etc.)||10,000||13,000||10,000||10,000||15,000||15,000|
|2.||C.F.I., Oxford (Central American Pines)||-||-||15,000||15,000||-||3,000|
|3.||I.N.I.F. Mexico (Mexican pines)||-||-||5,000||5,000||10,000||5,000|
|4.||I.U.F.R.O.(N. American conifers)||-||-||1,200||5,000||1,000||-|
|5.||UNDP/FAO/Brazil(Araucaria, tropical hardwoods)||-||-||-||8,000||3,000||-|
|6.||F.R.I. Nigeria/CTFT France (tropical hardwoods)||-||-||-||5,000||7,500||6,000|
|7.||I.S.S. Arezzo (Mediterranean conifers, eucalypts||-||5,000||3,000||1,500||-|
|8.||Seed Centre Macon, USA (cost of seed to developing countries)||-||-||-||500||1,000||1,000|
|9.||Papua New Guinea (Eucalypts, Araucaria etc.)||-||-||-||-||-||5,000|
|Sub-total (seed procurement)||10,000||14,500||36,200||51,500||40,000||35,000|
|B. EX SITU CONSERVATION STANDS|
|Sub-total (conservation stands)||-||-||-||-||-||10,000|
|1.||“Forest Genetic Resources Information”||-||-||-||16,000||17,500||13,600|
|2.||HQ staff direct costs|
|(a)||FAO Regular Programme||(5,000)||(10,000)||(12,000)||(18,500)||(21,000)||(28,000)|
|(b)||Finnish Government Programme||-||-||(4,000)||(16,500)||(4,000)||-|
Note: Figures in parenthesis are approximate
Division 2 - Forest Plants and Forest Protection
|S2.02-00||Species, provenances, and gene resources (H.Barner, Denmark; R.H. Kemp, UK ; J.F. Lacaze, France; V.I.Jermakov, USSR)|
|01||Dendrology (B.T.Styles, UK ;L.D.Pryor, Australia)|
|02||Conservation of gene resources (L.Roche, UK ; B.A.Ola-Adams, Nigeria)|
|03||Species monographs (M.Vidakovic, Yugoslavia;D.Funk, USA)|
|05||Douglas-fir provenances (Y.Birot,France; O.Sziklai, Canada)|
|06||Contorta pine provenances (R.Lines,UK;J.Remroed, Sweden)|
|07||Larch provenances (R.Schober,FRG; J.Sindelar, Czechoslovakia; S.Asada, Japan)|
|08||Tropical species provenances (H.Keiding,Denmark; P.J.Wood,UK;W.H.G.Barrett, Argentina; S.P.K.Britwum, Ghana)|
|09||Eucalypt provenances (L.Pederick,Australia; K.Diabate,Ivory Coast; M. Raggabi, Morocco)|
|10||Poplar provenances (R.Koster,Netherlands; J. Jokela, USA; S.P.Ivannikov, USSR; S.Y. Shim, Republic of Korea)|
|11||Norway spruce provenances (P.Krutzsch, Sweden; S.Kociecki, Poland)|
|12||Sitka spruce provenances (J.O'Driscoll,Ireland; K.Illingworth, Canada)|
|13||Mediterranean conifer provenances (R.Morandini, Italy; M. Arbez, France)|
|14||Abies provenances (A.M. Fletcher, UK)|
|S2.03-00||Breeding (J.Burley,UK; H.B.Kriebel,USA; S.Chiba, Japan)|
|01||Breeding tropical species (D.G. Nikles,Australia; G.A.O.Ojo,Nigeria)|
|02||Breeding white pines (H.Kriebel,USA; Emma de Vecchi-Pellati,Italy; H.Saho, Japan)|
|04||World directory of geneticists and tree breeders (H.Nienstädt, USA)|
|05||Breeding Scots pine (S. Bialobok, Poland; C. Matyas, Hungary)|
|06||Breeding nut species (V.Benea, Romania; M.Jovanovic, Yugoslavia; D.Funk, USA)|
|07||Breeding poplars (V.Steenackers,Belgium; E. Avanzo,Italy; L. Zufa, Canada; N.V. Starova, USSR)|
|09||Breeding Monterey pine (R.A.Griffin, Australia; R.Burdon, New Zealand; R.N. Delmastro, Chile)|
|10||Breeding eucalypts (J.Davidson,Papua New Guinea; G.van Wyk,South Africa; A. Brune, Brazil; K. Eldridge, Australia)|
|11||Breeding Norway spruce (J.Kleinschmit, FRG; V.Enescu, Romania)|
|12||Certifying genetic worth of forest reproductive materials (R. Koster,Netherlands; H. Barner, Denmark)|
|S2.04-00||Genetics (G.Namkoong,USA;C.J.A.Shelbourne,New Zealand)|
|01||Population and ecological genetics(C.Franklin,USA)|
|02||Breeding theory (A.Nanson,Belgium;M.Arbez,France)|
|03||Progeny testing (J.F. Kraus,USA;M.Wilcox,New Zealand)|
|05||Biochemical genetics and cytogenetics (P.T.Feret,USA;H.J. Muhs,FRG; L.C. Saylor, USA)|
AGREEMENT BETWEEN FAO AND THE FOREST DEPARTMENT OF
This agreement provides for the participation of the Forest Department of in a project for the establishment of ex situ conservation/selection stands of appropriate provenances of selected species. The project is funded by the United Nations Environment Programme (the Donor Agency) and executed by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) in collaboration with participating countries.
Operational Responsibilities of FAO
Responsibilities of the Forest Department of
The Forest Department of , during the life of the project, will:
After the end of the project, the Forest Department of undertakes to:
Location of Stands in
The stands covered by this agreement shall comprise the following (a note on the characteristics of recommended provenances is attached as Annex 7/4):
Entry into Force and Amendment
This agreement shall enter into force upon signature by both parties and may be amended by mutual consent.
|For the Forest Department of||For the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations|
|_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _||_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _|
|_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ (Title)||Chairman, Inter-Departmental|
Working Group on Natural Resources and the Human Environment
|_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _(Date)||_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ (Date)|
Recommended Prescriptions for the Establishment of ex situ conservation/selection stands
The success of this project will depend on preparation of, and strict adherence to, a detailed project plan and timetable. In view of the long-term nature of this undertaking it is suggested that careful records are made of each operation as it happens, especially if for any reason the actual procedure differs from the prescribed one. Notes on progress and condition of the provenances, both in the nursery and in the field, should be made at regular and frequent intervals. For this purpose a competent professional officer, familiar with nursery and plantation techniques, should be chosen and designated as responsible for the project and for drawing up the control plan. The following recommendations are made merely to assist him in doing so, and in supervising the operations.
One or more sites should be chosen which are representative of considerable areas of given climatic/soil regions.
In relation to a particular species, preference should be given to an area which has already shown promise for that species in previous species or provenance trials.
Consideration should be given to selecting two sites under different environmental conditions (a) as near as possible to the optimum for seed production of the species and (b) representative of the more difficult sites where the species might be used in plantations.
Access to the proposed sites should be adequate for the purposes of establishment, tending, protection and future management.
Security of tenure is obviously of prime importance in the selection of sites, and the best available reservation status should be chosen.
Climatic information should be adequate to ensure that the choice of site is appropriate to the provenance chosen.
Information should be available of the soil types of the selected sites including the average depth/texture.
The question of adequate drainage should be examined as both water-logging and soil drought for long periods are detrimental.
Although the species under consideration are tolerant of infertile soils, prior knowledge of the nutrient status of the proposed sites would be advantageous, since there is evidence that boron deficiency, for example, may cause dieback or stem crookedness.
Where the results of soil analysis, or evidence from field trials, indicate that fertilizers are advisable to assist establishment and early growth, they should be applied in accordance with successful local techniques.
The recommended plot size is 10 ha (e.g. 300 m × 330 m). Sufficient seed will be supplied to provide for this area per plot; however, should sufficient stock be produced to plant a larger area, this would be advantageous. Conversely, unforeseen losses may prevent the full area being planted, in which case the maximum area attainable will be acceptable.
The recommended plot shape is approximately square, but should circumstances dictate, a rectangular or other modification would be acceptable.
It is recommended that the best possible isolation of these conservation stands be sought to minimize hybridization, between them and existing or projected plots, trials, or regular plantations of the same or crossable species. In this connection wind direction at pollen shed may have to be taken into account.
The layout should include buffering between the two provenances on the one site, of appropriate magnitude and orientation to minimize hybridization. It may be possible to use another genus as a buffer between the two provenances, constituting a conservation stand in its own right. The recommended minimum distance between provenances is 330 m.
Finally, local conditions would determine the required demarcation of the plots to prevent accidental damage. Where browsing animals occur it may be necessary to securely fence the area.
The recommended spacing is 3 m × 3 m to allow for possible mechanical cultivation and later thinning.
The prime objective of the nursery/planting/tending procedures should be the establishment of a uniform, fully-stocked, and vigorous stand. In consequence it is recommended that the very best practices be adopted to ensure maximum survival and adequate growth. In furthering this aim it will usually be necessary to adopt procedures which are somewhat more careful and more expensive than normal routine measures.
It is recommended that sowing and tending in the nursery should be supervised by a competent professional officer or technician experienced in handling and raising the species.
Direct sowing of seed into pots or polythene tubes is recommended subject to local experience. If for some reason this method is not feasible, sowing should be carried out in sand trays, followed by careful transplanting at the cotyledon stage into pots or tubes.
Tropical mycorrhizae are an essential requirement for healthy growth of tropical pines. It is assumed that previous trial plots will have established mycorrhizal infection and it is recommended that soil containing mycorrhizal material be mixed with the potting soil mixture. If mycorrhizal material is not locally available, arrangements will need to be made for its importation (subject to quarantine restrictions).
Watering, shading, weeding, root pruning, fertilizing, hardening off, etc. procedures should follow the best local proven techniques.
The amount of seed provided will allow a margin for losses in the nursery, culling, and losses at planting.
Every pot or tube should be individually colour coded by paint marks before leaving the nursery to prevent any possibility of confusion between provenances in handling and transit.
Site preparation by complete cultivation is the preferred procedure, especially in climates of low rainfall and long dry season. In consequence, stands should be put on gentle slopes, on deep soils with good aeration. Acid clays with defective internal aeration should be avoided.
Special supervision should be given to lifting and transport of tubes/plots; e.g. thorough wetting before leaving the nursery, so that planting shock is minimized. Direct sowing or bare root planting are not recommended in this case.
Polypots or tubes should be removed at the time of planting, but paper pots are planted with the plant.
Replacement of failures is seldom necessary due to the high survival usually obtained with potted or tubed plants. If necessary, filling of blanks should preferably be completed 2 – 3 months after the initial planting, if the rainfall regime permits.
Local conditions will dictate the pioneer species, grasses, etc. which will appear after planting, and likewise the methods appropriate for their removal. In many cases hand weeding would be the usual technique. Where complete site preparation has been possible, machine cultivation between the rows would be the most satisfactory method, but care must be taken not to damage the plants by the machines. Complete removal of weeds is strongly recommended as a precaution against fire damage during the early years.
Recommended Prescriptions for the long-term Management of ex situ conservation/selection stands
1. In order to serve their purpose as conservation/selection stands, it is essential that adequate measures be taken to protect them from fire. It is recommended that appropriate fire lines be cleared around the plots and their buffers, giving special attention to grassland areas, and monsoonal climates with a marked dry season.
The siting of plots within areas already receiving adequate protection would be advantageous.
2. It is anticipated that additional funds will become available to cover the costs of tending and protection from 3rd–5th year by which time canopy should have closed.
3. When UNEP funding has ceased, responsibility for protection and stand treatment will rest with the host country. It is recommended that (a) high standards of protection be maintained, and (b) that the stands be thinned as necessary to maintain growth rates and encourage the production of seed.
4. When thinnings are made it will be necessary to take account of the desirability of maintaining genetic diversity, by mechanical thinning, as well as the possibility of producing improved seed, through selective removal of the poorer phenotypes. It is likely that these two aims must be pursued separately, in separate plots. Recommendations to guide decisions on the most appropriate thinning method for each provenance/site will be made later, taking account of information available from ongoing provenance research.
5. As indicated in Annex 7/1 it is recommended that precautions to maintain the legal status of the plots form a basic tenet of their long-term management.
Costs (US$) of ex situ conservation/selection stands
The funds available for the establishment of ex situ stands will be in accordance with the following table of standard estimated costs:
US $ per ha
|P-1||P+0||P+1||P+2||P+3||T o t a l|
|where||P-1||equals the year before planting;|
|and||P+0||" " " of planting.|
The same figures apply to any buffer strips or blocks which must be planted at the same time. In some cases buffer strips/blocks may themselves be conservation/selection stands, fulfilling two purposes.
Thus, for the two-year period of the project, each hectare of stand or buffer will be funded to the extent of US $250.
Countries which are able to carry out the operation more cheaply will be able to plant more than 10 ha per plot, and conversely more expensive operations than the above estimates will diminish the area which can be planted.
Subsequent costs (P+1 and later) are assumed to be covered by a further follow-up project.
Choice of Provenances for ex situ conservation/selection stands
With the background of information from seed collecting teams in the Central American region, together with results to date of routine planting, species trial plantings, and provenance trials, it is possible to indicate seed sources with strong claims for inclusion in the project.
In certain cases it has not been possible to collect enough seed to establish conservation stands, and the second best choice has had to be made.
For this pilot programme, it seemed prudent to choose provenances at the extremes of the range, or those which are already endangered, leaving intermediate sources, or those reasonably secure, for future consideration.
2. Pinus caribaea var. hondurensis
The seed source of P. caribaea from Mountain Pine Ridge (Belize) is not a candidate for conservation/selection stands, since it is the source from which extensive plantations have already been established in many tropical countries, and it is reasonably secure in its natural range.
Details of four provenances which might be chosen are given in the following table, together with supplementary footnotes.
|Site||Seed Lot No.||Lat.|
|Length of Dry season (1)|
Notes: (1) Number of months with less than 60 mm rainfall.
(2) The most southerly, tropical and wettest provenance, but trees are scattered and stunted and seed is only available in small quantities, and at present (1976) the amount is inadequate for general distribution to participating countries. Endangered within natural range.
(3) One of the most tropical and wettest provenances (though less so than Pinar Sufficient seed available for distribution to a number of sites.
(4) Intermediate in altitude, rainfall and length of dry season. Not immediately endangered in natural stands, but could become so. Seed available from commercial suppliers and has been planted in a number of introducing countries. Lower priority than (3) or (5).
(5) One of the highest and driest provenances. Endangered in natural range. Adequate seed available.
3. Pinus oocarpa
Details of three provenances which might be chosen are given in the following table:
|Site||Seed Lot No.||Lat.|
|Length of Dry season (1)|
|1.||Mountain Pine Ridge (2)|
Notes: (1) Number of months with less than 60 mm rainfall.
(2) The most northerly of CFI collections which is one of the most promising in provenance trials. Less extensive and secure than P. caribaea in Mountain Pine Ridge, and less extensively introduced overseas.
(3) One of the more southerly provenances which is among the most promising in provenance trials. Endangered in native range.
(4) In the same general area as (3), but growing in considerably drier condition and even more endangered.
Only two eucalypts have been considered for inclusion in the pilot project for conservation/selection stands, viz: Eucalyptus camaldulensis and E. tereticornis, although there are many others suitable for tropical and sub-tropical situations.
Descriptions of the distribution, climate, variation, etc. may be found in Turnbull, J.W. (The Ecology and Variation of Eucalyptus camaldulensis), Forest Genetic Resources Information - No.2, FAO, 1973, and Lacaze, J.F. (Etude de l'Adaptation Ecologique des Eucalyptus) FAO, 1970.
Suffice it to say that E. camaldulensis is the most widely distributed eucalypt in Australia, while E. tereticornis also covers a very wide spectrum of climates. Both have been planted extensively throughout the world, and in many countries have been an outstanding success.
2. Eucalyptus camaldulensis
Since 1964 seed has been collected from throughout the natural range, primarily to make available a large number of different provenances for research. More recently however, larger collections have been made from sources which have shown early superiority in provenance trials. Among these are the provenances shown in the following table from which a choice may be made.
|Site||Nearest Meteor. Station||Lat.|
Ann. Max. Temp.|
Ann. Min. Temp.|
|Mt. Surprise|| 18°09'|
|Fitzroy Crossing|| 18°12'|
Notes: 1. The Petford provenance comes from a region classified as the Tropical Highlands Zone with a summer rainfall and a pronounced winter drought (i.e. a total rainfall of 54 mm in the five months May – September). In provenance trials it has been consistently superior in moister tropical savanna conditions in Nigeria and Congo. It has some affinity with E. tereticornis.
2. The Katherine provenance comes from the Tropical Inland Zone of the Northern Territory, with a summer rainfall. Although the total rainfall is higher than at Petford, the winter drought is more severe (i.e. a total rainfall of 15 mm in the five months May – September), and temperatures are higher throughout the year. It has proved consistently superior in more arid tropical savanna conditions.
3. A provenance that has proved consistently superior throughout the Mediterranean region is from Lake Albacutya in a more temperate zone. The rainfall is well distributed, with slightly more in winter than in summer (41% in the six summer months November – April).
1 Rainfall recorded at Petford P.O.: 856 mm.
2 Rainfall recorded at Gibb River Homestead: 768 mm.
3. Eucalyptus tereticornis
Following success with the E. camaldulensis provenance collections attention was turned to E. tereticornis and some 25 provenances were collected from 1970–73, including seed from tropical sites.
Seed of two tropical provenances is now available in larger quantities for conservation/selection stands. These are from Cooktown and Mt. Garnet, both in North Queensland.
Data are shown in the table below:
|Site||Nearest Meteor. Station||Lat.|
|Mean Ann. Max. Temp.|
|Mean Ann. Min. Temp.|
|Mt. Surprise|| 18°09'|
Notes: The Mt. Garnet provenance of E. tereticornis comes from the same general area as the Petford provenance of E. camaldulensis, and there are affinities between them. Indeed Turnbull (loc. cit) mentions a well defined intermediate form.
The Cooktown source is located somewhat further north. Although temperatures are not available they would be similar to those at Mt. Surprise.