Previous Page Table of Contents Next Page


Appendix 1

ChairmanR. MorandiniIstituto Sperimentale per la Selvicoltura
52100 Arezzo, Italy
Vice-ChairmanM. HagmanForest Research Institute
Forest Tree Breeding Station
Maisala, Finland
MembersW.H.G. BarrettFiplasto Forestal S.A.
Maipu 942 - Piso 21
Buenos Aires, Argentina
W.G. Dyson 1East African Agriculture and Forestry Research Organization
P.O. Box 30148
Nairobi, Kenya
R.C. GhoshForest Research Institute and Colleges
Dehra Dun, India
M.J. GroulezCentre Technique Forestier Tropical
45 bis Avenue de la Belle Gabrielle
Nogent-sur-Marne (Seine), France
P. HoekstraDivision of Cooperative Forestry
Forest Service
Washington D.C. 20250, U.S.A.
D.E. IyamaboAgricultural Research Council of Nigeria
P.M.B. 5382
Ibadan, Nigeria
alternateH. Keiding
H. Barner
Danish/FAO Forest Tree Seed Centre
DK- 3050 Humlebaek, Denmark
 R.H. KempCommonwealth Forestry Institute
Oxford OX1 3RB, United Kingdom
J.W. TurnbullDepartment of Forestry
Australian National University
P.O. Box 4
Canberra A.C.T. 2600, Australia
alternateR. Villarreal
F. Patiño
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
Rome, Italy

1 Present address: CATIE, Turrialba, Costa Rica.

Appendix 2


Fourth Session

Canberra 9 – 11 March 1977

  1. Adoption of agenda

  2. Progress since 3rd session of Panel (May 1974)

    1. Statements by individual members
    2. FAO Regular Programme
    3. FAO/UNEP project on Conservation of Forest Genetic Resources
    4. Other international activities

  3. Review of the Global Programme on Forest Genetic Resources

    1. Introduction
    2. Exploration and collection
    3. Evaluation - international provenance trials
    4. Ex situ conservation
    5. In situ conservation
    6. Flowering, reproduction and seed research. Seed certification
    7. International seed orchards
    8. Data storage and retrieval
    9. Institutional aspects - training, information exchange, coordination
    10. Revision of priorities
    11. Synthesis of the global programme - operational and geographical balance

  4. Proposals for FAO Regular Programme 1978/79

  5. Proposals for FAO/UNEP follow-up project on Conservation of Forest Genetic Resources

  6. Proposals for other projects

  7. Miscellaneous

    1. Future activities of the Panel
    2. Third World Consultation on Forest Tree Breeding
    3. Any other business

Appendix 3

May 1974 – March 1977

  1. 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.

  2. 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.

  3. 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.

  4. 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.

  5. 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.

  6. 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.

  7. 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.

  8. 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.

  9. 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.

  10. 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.

  11. 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.

Appendix 4

Pinus oocarpa

Lot No. LocationQuantity of seeds
171 Chinameca, Hgo.1.550
353Valle de Bravo, Mexico1.300
365Chanal, Chis.0.200
367Lagunas de Monte Bello, Chis.1.900
376Ario de Rosales, Mich.0.900
378Mazamitla, Jal.0.900
379La Tzararacua, Mich.1.900
390Playitas, Mich.0.745
392Palos Altos, Jal.1.100
398Valle de Bravo, Mex.2.600
399El Llano, Zitacuaro - Susupuato, Mich.2.100
417Matanguaran, Mich.2.300
420San Angel, Mich.0.330
422Los Arroyos, Mich.0.620
423La Loma Uruapan - Apatzingan, Mich.0.480
480Ziracuaretiro, Mich.0.900
481Matanguaran y La Tzararacua, Mich.1.800
485La Huacan y Ario de Rosales, Mich.1.100
450Ario de Rosales, Mich.1.100
502Jucutacato, Mich.1.550
534La Codicia, Ocosingo, Chis.5.200
535La 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)    "          "
  -Zinacantan    "          "
  -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    "          "
  -Chilon    "          "
  -San Francisco (margaritas)    "          "
  -Coapilla - Ocotepec    "          "

Pinus patula

Lot No. LocationQuantity of seeds
340 Zacualtipan, Hidalgo0.640
402Zacualtipan, Hgo. desv. a Tianquistengo2.300
403Jacala, Hidalgo0.790
464La Venta, D.F.2.000
510La Venta, D.F.1.950
  -Jacala, Hgo.being processed
  -Zacatlan, Puebla. "             "    


Map 1


Map 2

▲ Seed lots collected
□ Seed lots to be collected in season 1976–77

Appendix 5


1.F.R.I. and C.S.I.R.O. Canberra(Eucalypts, Araucaria, etc.)10,00013,00010,00010,00015,00015,000
2.C.F.I., Oxford (Central American Pines)--15,00015,000-  3,000
3.I.N.I.F. Mexico (Mexican pines)--  5,000  5,00010,000  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
10.Others-  1,500--  1,000-
Sub-total (seed procurement)10,00014,50036,20051,50040,00035,000
1.F.R.I. Nigeria-----  5,000
2.C.T.F.T. Congo----  5,000
Sub-total (conservation stands) - - - - - 10,000
1.“Forest Genetic Resources Information”---16,00017,50013,600
1.Panel Meetings-(10,000)  (9,000)-(14,000)  (19,000)
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)-
Sub-total (other)  (5,000)(20,000)(25,000)  (35,000)(39,000)  (47,000)

Note: Figures in parenthesis are approximate

Appendix 6

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)
01Dendrology (B.T.Styles, UK ;L.D.Pryor, Australia)
02Conservation of gene resources (L.Roche, UK ; B.A.Ola-Adams, Nigeria)
03Species monographs (M.Vidakovic, Yugoslavia;D.Funk, USA)
05Douglas-fir provenances (Y.Birot,France; O.Sziklai, Canada)
06Contorta pine provenances (R.Lines,UK;J.Remroed, Sweden)
07Larch provenances (R.Schober,FRG; J.Sindelar, Czechoslovakia; S.Asada, Japan)
08Tropical species provenances (H.Keiding,Denmark; P.J.Wood,UK;W.H.G.Barrett, Argentina; S.P.K.Britwum, Ghana)
09Eucalypt provenances (L.Pederick,Australia; K.Diabate,Ivory Coast; M. Raggabi, Morocco)
10Poplar provenances (R.Koster,Netherlands; J. Jokela, USA; S.P.Ivannikov, USSR; S.Y. Shim, Republic of Korea)
11Norway spruce provenances (P.Krutzsch, Sweden; S.Kociecki, Poland)
12Sitka spruce provenances (J.O'Driscoll,Ireland; K.Illingworth, Canada)
13Mediterranean conifer provenances (R.Morandini, Italy; M. Arbez, France)
14Abies provenances (A.M. Fletcher, UK)
S2.03-00Breeding (J.Burley,UK; H.B.Kriebel,USA; S.Chiba, Japan)
01Breeding tropical species (D.G. Nikles,Australia; G.A.O.Ojo,Nigeria)
02Breeding white pines (H.Kriebel,USA; Emma de Vecchi-Pellati,Italy; H.Saho, Japan)
04World directory of geneticists and tree breeders (H.Nienstädt, USA)
05Breeding Scots pine (S. Bialobok, Poland; C. Matyas, Hungary)
06Breeding nut species (V.Benea, Romania; M.Jovanovic, Yugoslavia; D.Funk, USA)
07Breeding poplars (V.Steenackers,Belgium; E. Avanzo,Italy; L. Zufa, Canada; N.V. Starova, USSR)
09Breeding Monterey pine (R.A.Griffin, Australia; R.Burdon, New Zealand; R.N. Delmastro, Chile)
10Breeding eucalypts (J.Davidson,Papua New Guinea; G.van Wyk,South Africa; A. Brune, Brazil; K. Eldridge, Australia)
11Breeding Norway spruce (J.Kleinschmit, FRG; V.Enescu, Romania)
12Certifying genetic worth of forest reproductive materials (R. Koster,Netherlands; H. Barner, Denmark)
S2.04-00Genetics (G.Namkoong,USA;C.J.A.Shelbourne,New Zealand)
01Population and ecological genetics(C.Franklin,USA)
02Breeding theory (A.Nanson,Belgium;M.Arbez,France)
03Progeny testing (J.F. Kraus,USA;M.Wilcox,New Zealand)
05Biochemical genetics and cytogenetics (P.T.Feret,USA;H.J. Muhs,FRG; L.C. Saylor, USA)

Appendix 7



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

FAO will:

  1. recruit and pay short-term consultants to advise on specific aspects of the project;
  2. pay for the transport and daily subsistence of such consultants for travel to and within                       in relation to the project;
  3. arrange for the provision of the required quantities of seed of the special provenances selected;
  4. arrange for the transfer of the funds of the Donor Agency to cover the standard estimated costs of establishment of the stands over the first two years according to the cost structure outlined in Annex 7/3, and, subject to availability of additional funds, for a maximum of a further three years;
  5. regularly inform the Forest Department of                       of the progress in implementing the project in other countries.

Responsibilities of the Forest Department of                

The Forest Department of                       , during the life of the project, will:

  1. grant all necessary facilities to consultants, recruited by FAO and agreed by                       , who may visit the country in connection with the implementation of the project;
  2. assume operational responsibilities and provide adequate supervision for the establishment of the stands at mutually agreed locations, and to mutually agreed prescriptions for their layout and isolation (see Annex 7/1);
  3. take all possible measures to establish the conservation/selection stands at the earliest possible time;
  4. submit to FAO reports on the progress of the project, together with statements of expenditure of the UNEP contribution, by 30 June and 31 December 1978.
  5. submit to FAO, on the completion of the project, certification that the UNEP contribution has been used for the purposes specified in this agreement.

After the end of the project, the Forest Department of undertakes to:

  1. assume responsibility for the continuing protection of the stands from fire and other causes of damage and for their subsequent treatment (e.g.) thining, and long-term management as conservation/selection seed stands (see Annex 7/2);
  2. make available to other countries, at cost, up to 50% of the eventual seed production of such stands and reasonable quantities of vegetative propagating material if requested to do so;
  3. take action in the distribution of seed and vegetative propagating material between requesting countries or institutions in accordance with procedures to be agreed with FAO in due course.

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 ofFor the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ (Title)Chairman, Inter-Departmental
Working Group on Natural Resources and the Human Environment
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _(Date)_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _  (Date)

Annex 7/1

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.

1. Site

  1. One or more sites should be chosen which are representative of considerable areas of given climatic/soil regions.

  2. 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.

  3. 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.

  4. Access to the proposed sites should be adequate for the purposes of establishment, tending, protection and future management.

  5. Security of tenure is obviously of prime importance in the selection of sites, and the best available reservation status should be chosen.

2. Climate

Climatic information should be adequate to ensure that the choice of site is appropriate to the provenance chosen.

3. Soils

  1. Information should be available of the soil types of the selected sites including the average depth/texture.

  2. The question of adequate drainage should be examined as both water-logging and soil drought for long periods are detrimental.

  3. 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.

  4. 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.

4. Layout

  1. 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.

  2. The recommended plot shape is approximately square, but should circumstances dictate, a rectangular or other modification would be acceptable.

  3. 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.

  4. 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.

  5. 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.

  6. The recommended spacing is 3 m × 3 m to allow for possible mechanical cultivation and later thinning.

5. Nursery

  1. 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.

  2. 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.

  3. 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.

  4. 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).

  5. Watering, shading, weeding, root pruning, fertilizing, hardening off, etc. procedures should follow the best local proven techniques.

  6. The amount of seed provided will allow a margin for losses in the nursery, culling, and losses at planting.

  7. 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.

6. Planting

  1. 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.

  2. 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.

  3. Polypots or tubes should be removed at the time of planting, but paper pots are planted with the plant.

  4. 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.

  5. 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.

Annex 7/2

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.

Annex 7/3

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-1P+0P+1P+2P+3T o t a l
whereP-1equals the year before planting;
andP+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.

Annex 7/4

Choice of Provenances for ex situ conservation/selection stands

A. Pines

1. General

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.

 SiteSeed Lot No.Lat.
 Length of Dry season (1)
1.Pinar (2)
< 10   
4 0000
2.Alamicamba (3)
 252 9001
3.Poptun (4)
5001 7003
4.Limones (5)
(Honduras Rep.)
700   6606

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:

SiteSeed Lot No.Lat.
Length of Dry season (1)
1.Mountain Pine Ridge (2)
  7001 6002
2.Yucul (3)
  9001 4005
3.Bonete (4)
1 000  9505

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.

B. Eucalypts

1. General

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.

SiteNearest Meteor. StationLat.
Mean Ann. Max. Temp.
Mean Ann. Min. Temp.
Dry Season
1.Petford 1
Mt. Surprise  18°09'
(N. Territory)
Katherine  14°06'
3.Lake Albacutya
Rainbow  35°54'
4.Gibb River2
(W. Australia)
Fitzroy Crossing  18°12'
26 Jan.
11 July

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:

SiteNearest Meteor. StationLat.
Mean Ann. Max. Temp.
Mean Ann. Min. Temp.
Dry Season
Cooktown  15°28'
2.Mt. Garnet
Mt. Surprise  18°09'
454  7163116Winter

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.

Previous Page Top of Page Next Page