*
 

iForest - Biogeosciences and Forestry

*

Monitoring of the incidence of Dutch Elm Disease and mortality in experimental plantations of French Ulmus minor clones

Eric Collin (1), Tiffani Pozzi (1), Cécile Joyeau (1)   , Stéphane Matz (1), Michel Rondouin (2), Claudine Joly (3)

iForest - Biogeosciences and Forestry, Volume 15, Issue 4, Pages 289-298 (2022)
doi: https://doi.org/10.3832/ifor3820-015
Published: Jul 29, 2022 - Copyright © 2022 SISEF

Research Articles


The results of 16 experimental plantations of Ulmus minor clones of the French national collection are presented as a complement to a previous work (Collin et al. 2020) on the outcome of the French Programme for the Conservation of Native Elm Genetic Resources. A total of 710 elms from 38 clones were planted in three different regions of France using two types of experimental designs and exposed to natural infection by Dutch Elm Disease (DED). DED infection and subsequent mortality were monitored in rectangular monospecific plantations (“plot-tests”), comprising at least 100 elms (10 clones). Linear plantations of 15 to 36 elms intermixed with other trees and shrubs (“hedge-tests”) investigated the feasibility of using native field elm clones in hedge reconstruction projects. After at least 9 (up to 17) years of experimentation, overall DED infection frequency was 33%, with scores above 63% in the oldest plantation and in two fast-growing tests. The overall mortality in the 232 diseased trees was 21%, reaching 29% in the oldest plantation and 64% in a hedge-test on high quality soil, suggesting a possible effect of the very fast growth of the trees. A few clones showed an interesting lower infection frequency or some ability to recover, whereas some others were found quickly infected in several tests and could serve in future experiments on clone attractiveness for DED vectors. Practical conclusions for genetic resources conservation consist of recommendations for the establishment of conservation plantations using regional clones.

  Keywords


Ulmus minor, Plantation, Dutch Elm Disease, Ophiostoma novo-ulmi, Genetic Resources, France

Authors’ address

(1)
Eric Collin
Tiffani Pozzi 0000-0003-2540-3757
Cécile Joyeau
Stéphane Matz
INRAE, UR EFNO, F-45290 Nogent-sur-Vernisson (France)
(2)
Michel Rondouin
Office National des Forêts, Pôle National des Ressources Génétiques Forestières, F-44290 Guémené-Penfao (France)
(3)
Claudine Joly
CREPAN, 8 rue Germaine Tillion, F-14000 Caen (France)

Corresponding author

 
Cécile Joyeau
cecile.joyeau@inrae.fr

Citation

Collin E, Pozzi T, Joyeau C, Matz S, Rondouin M, Joly C (2022). Monitoring of the incidence of Dutch Elm Disease and mortality in experimental plantations of French Ulmus minor clones. iForest 15: 289-298. - doi: 10.3832/ifor3820-015

Academic Editor

Alberto Santini

Paper history

Received: Mar 21, 2021
Accepted: Jun 13, 2022

First online: Jul 29, 2022
Publication Date: Aug 31, 2022
Publication Time: 1.53 months

Breakdown by View Type

(Waiting for server response...)

Article Usage

Total Article Views: 3713
(from publication date up to now)

Breakdown by View Type
HTML Page Views: 3204
Abstract Page Views: 233
PDF Downloads: 235
Citation/Reference Downloads: 3
XML Downloads: 38

Web Metrics
Days since publication: 122
Overall contacts: 3713
Avg. contacts per week: 213.04

Article Citations

Article citations are based on data periodically collected from the Clarivate Web of Science web site
(last update: Jul 2021)

(No citations were found up to date. Please come back later)


 

Publication Metrics

by Dimensions ©

Articles citing this article

List of the papers citing this article based on CrossRef Cited-by.

 
(1)
Aitken SN, Whitlock MC (2013)
Assisted gene flow to facilitate local adaptation to climate change. Annual Review of Ecology Evolution and Systematics 44: 367-388.
CrossRef | Gscholar
(2)
Anderbrant O, Yuvaraj JK, Martin J, Rodriguez-Gil JL, Witzell J (2017)
Feeding by Scolytus bark beetles to test for differently susceptible elm varieties. Journal of Applied Entomology 141: 417-420.
CrossRef | Gscholar
(3)
Beier GL, Blanchette RA (2020)
Xylem characteristics in Ulmus americana cultivars and their potential use as a preliminary screening method for Dutch elm disease resistance. Forest Pathology 50: e12638.
CrossRef | Gscholar
(4)
Brasier C (2001)
Rapid evolution of introduced plant pathogens via interspecific hybridization. BioScience 51: 123-133.
CrossRef | Gscholar
(5)
Brasier CM, Webber JF (2019)
Is there evidence for post-epidemic attenuation in the Dutch elm disease pathogen Ophiostoma novo-ulmi? Plant Pathology 68: 921-929.
CrossRef | Gscholar
(6)
Buiteveld J, Vanden Broeck A, Cox K, Collin E (2016)
Human impact on the genetic diversity of Dutch field elm (Ulmus minor) populations in the Netherlands: implications for conservation. Plant Ecology and Evolution 149: 165-176.
CrossRef | Gscholar
(7)
Collin E, Bozzano M (2015)
Implementing the dynamic conservation of elm genetic resources in Europe: case studies and perspectives. iForest 8: 143-148.
CrossRef | Gscholar
(8)
Collin E, Rondouin M, Joyeau C, Matz S, Raimbault P, Harvengt L, Bilger I, Guibert M (2020)
Conservation and use of elm genetic resources in France: results and perspectives. iForest 13: 41-47.
CrossRef | Gscholar
(9)
Cox K, Vanden Broeck A, Vander Mijnsbrugge K, Buiteveld J, Collin E, Heybroek HM, Mergeay J (2014)
Interspecific hybridisation and interaction with cultivars affect the genetic variation of Ulmus minor and Ulmus glabra in Flanders. Tree Genetics and Genomes 10: 813-826.
CrossRef | Gscholar
(10)
Eriksson G, Namkoong G, Roberds J (1993)
Dynamic gene conservation for uncertain futures. Forest Ecology and Management 62: 15-37.
CrossRef | Gscholar
(11)
Girard S (2007)
Comportement de différents ormes en haies bocagères et en forêt [Performance of different elms in field hedges and forest]. Forêt-Entreprise 175: 42-46. [in French]
Gscholar
(12)
Goodall-Copestake WP, Hollingsworth ML, Hollingsworth PM, Jenkins GI, Collin E (2005)
Molecular markers and ex situ conservation of the European elms (Ulmus spp.). Biological Conservation 122 4: 537-546.
CrossRef | Gscholar
(13)
Heybroek H (1993)
The Dutch elm breeding programme. In: “Dutch Elm Disease Research, Cellular and Molecular Approaches” (Sticklen MB, Sherald JL eds). Springer, New York, USA, pp. 16-25.
Gscholar
(14)
Jürisoo L, Süda I, Agan A, Drenkhan R (2021)
Vectors of Dutch Elm Disease in Northern Europe. Insects 12 (5): 393.
CrossRef | Gscholar
(15)
Martin JA, Solla A, Ruiz-Villar M, Gil L (2013)
Vessel length and conductivity of Ulmus branches: ontogenetic changes and relation to resistance to Dutch elm disease. Trees 27 1239-1248.
CrossRef | Gscholar
(16)
Martin JA, Solla A, Venturas M, Collada C, Dominguez J, Miranda E, Fuentes P, Buron M, Iglesias S, Gil L (2015)
Seven Ulmus minor clones tolerant to Ophiostoma novo-ulmi registered as forest reproductive material in Spain. iForest 8: 172-180.
CrossRef | Gscholar
(17)
Martin JA, Sobrino-Plata J, Rodriguez-Calcerrada J, Collada C, Gil L (2019)
Breeding and scientific advances in the fight against Dutch elm disease: will they allow the use of elms in forest restoration? New Forests 50: 183-215.
CrossRef | Gscholar
(18)
Martin JA, Solla A, Oszako T, Gil L (2021a)
Characterizing offspring of Dutch elm disease-resistant trees (Ulmus minor Mill.). Forestry 94 (3): 374-385.
CrossRef | Gscholar
(19)
Martin JA, Domínguez J, Solla A, Brasier CM, Webber JF, Santini A, Martinez-Arias C, Bernier L, Gil L (2021b)
Complexities underlying the breeding and deployment of Dutch elm disease resistant elms. New Forests 2021: 1-36.
CrossRef | Gscholar
(20)
Mittempergher L, Bartolini G, Ferrini F, Panicucci M (1992)
Aspects of elm propagation by soft and hardwood cuttings. Suelo y Planta 2 (1): 129-137.
Online | Gscholar
(21)
Pajares JA, García S, Díez JJ, Martín D, García-Vallejo MC (2004)
Feeding responses by Scolytus scolytus to twig bark extracts from elms. Forest Systems 13 (1): 217-225.
Online | Gscholar
(22)
Pinon J, Husson C, Collin E (2005)
Susceptibility of native French elm clones to Ophiostoma novo-ulmi. Annals of Forest Science 62: 689-696.
CrossRef | Gscholar
(23)
Pinon J, Cadic A (2007)
Les ormes résistants à la graphiose [DED resistant elm cultivars]. Forêt-Entreprise 175: 37-41. [in French]
Gscholar
(24)
Rousseau J, Joly C (2007)
La graphiose en Basse-Normandie depuis 20 ans [20 years with DED in Lower-Normandy]. Forêt-Entreprise 175: 26-28. [in French]
Gscholar
(25)
Solla A, Gil L (2002)
Influence of water stress on Dutch elm disease symptoms in Ulmus minor. Canadian Journal of Botany 80: 810-817.
CrossRef | Gscholar
(26)
Solla A, Bohnens J, Collin E, Diamandis S, Franke A, Gil L, Buron M, Santini A, Mittempergher L, Pinon J, Vanden Broeck A (2005)
Screening European elms for resistance to Ophiostoma novo-ulmi. Forest Science 51 (2): 134-141.
Online | Gscholar
(27)
Solla A, López-Almansa JC, Martín JA, Gil L (2014)
Genetic variation and heritability estimates of Ulmus minor and Ulmus pumila hybrids for budburst, growth and tolerance to Ophiostoma novo-ulmi. iForest 8: 422-430.
CrossRef | Gscholar
(28)
Végétal local (2019)
Une marque au service de la nature [A brand at the service of nature]. Web site. [in French]
Online | Gscholar
(29)
Webber J (2000)
Insect vector behaviour and the evolution of Dutch elm disease. In: “The Elms: Breeding, Conservation and Disease Management” (Dunn CP ed). Kluwer, Boston, MS, USA, pp. 47-60.
Gscholar
 

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. More info