Translated Titles

Evaluation on growth performs of 9-years Casuarina junghuhniana provenances in Taiwan





Key Words

山木麻黃 ; 種源試驗 ; 歸群分析 ; 形態性狀 ; Casuarina junghuhniana ; provenance trials ; cluster analysis ; morphological characteristics



Volume or Term/Year and Month of Publication


Academic Degree Category




Content Language


Chinese Abstract

本試驗為澳洲CSIRO統籌山木麻黃國際種源試驗之一部分,以印尼原生種及非洲栽培種共28個種源為試驗材料,在台灣海岸及山地等4個不同生育地進行栽植試驗。調查及分析山木麻黃1-9年生造林木12項定量及定性之生長與形態性狀資料,結果顯示各試區種源間之生長性狀皆達顯著差異,且具有顯著的種源與環境之交感效應。山木麻黃28個種源於四湖試區之成活率、樹高及胸徑生長皆以帝汶(Timor)島的17號種源表現較佳;而在台中港試區之成活率則以帝汶島的20號種源最高,樹高生長則以帝汶島的16-19號種源表現優異,胸徑生長則以帝汶島的19號種源為最佳;另在多納試區則以4號種源之成活率和樹高生長表現最佳,而胸徑生長則以巴厘(Bali)島的10號種源最佳;於太麻里試區之成活率以肯亞(Kenya)的23號種源最佳,樹高與胸徑生長則以倫巴(Lombok)島的14號種源表現最佳。 分別計算山木麻黃1-9年廣義遺傳率,結果顯示樹高、胸徑生長在四湖、多納試驗地以第2年為最高;在太麻里者以第6年為最高;而台中港者樹高之遺傳率則以第1年可達最高。此外分析種源年份間相對生長之變異,結果顯示不同種源在不同時間之生長達顯著之差異,且有顯著的種源與林齡之間的交感效應;以第2年和其它年份進行相關分析結果顯示除太麻里之胸徑與材積生長未達顯著外,其餘皆達顯著相關。 進行主成分因子分析與歸群分析,以了解種源間之地理變異趨勢,在四湖、台中港試驗地結果顯示在低海拔之威特島(Wetar)之21號種源在空間分布上與其它種源之距離最遠,而印尼中高海拔之帝汶島16~20號等5個種源則明顯歸為一群,其它中高海拔之種源則另自成一集團,而在多納與太麻里試驗地則無明顯相同之趨勢。 種源間營養或繁殖生長物候呈現非常大的差異性,一般而言其終年皆可進行生長,並不斷重複物候現象。惟在10-2月時生長開始明顯受阻,推測可能是受東北季風或低溫之影響;以迴歸分析之結果顯示雄花始花日與山木麻黃原產地之海拔呈顯著負相關,顯示在四湖試驗地山木麻黃開花始日會隨其原產地海拔升高而提早之趨勢。

English Abstract

This study was undertaken as a part of international provenance trials of Casuarina junghuhniana coordinated by CSIRO, Australia. The present trial compared 28 provenances of C. junghuhniana from natural occurrence and land races, and variations in 12 growth and morphological characteristics were assessed in 1 to 9-years old stands at 4 sites in Taiwan. Considerable genetic variations among natural provenance and land races of C. junghuhniana with a significant site-by-provenance interaction were revealed. Provenance no. 16-20 from Timor Island, Indonesia, and no. 21 from Old Uhak NE Wetar, Indonesia, were selected as the superior seed sources for all 4 sites, based on Tukey’s multiple range tests of their survival rate, height, and diameter growth. The broad sense heritability (h2) of provenance in all grown traits were estimated from 1 to 9-years old after plating. The grown was better in 2- years old at Sihhu and Dona, and was better heritability in 1 and 6-years old at Taichung harbor and Taimalee, respective. Data use to estimate relative growth trends in C. junghuhniana and correlation analyze. A summary of the analyses of variance over years for each site, suggested the provenance, age and age-by- provenance interaction was significant in each site. There was significant correlation of grown in 2-years old and each 1 to 9-yeas old in Sihhu, Dona and Taichung harbor. Results from both cluster and factor analysis with a principal component solution suggested that the 28 provenances could be classified into 3 geographical groups in Sihhu and Taichung harbor. The first group originated from Old Uhak NE Wetar, Indonesia and was far side of the other provenances. The second group consisted of 5 provenances from Timor, with the remaining provenances being classified into the third group. These results suggest that the ecoclines of C. junghuhniana might be affected by elevation. The phonological phase observation shows that the long grown phonological stage was without in October to February. Supposition because by northeasterly monsoon winds. There was large variation of phonological phase among and within provenance. A conclusion by regresion analyses a significant negative relationship of elevation with initial male flower phase.

Topic Category 農業暨自然資源學院 > 森林學系所
生物農學 > 森林
  1. 何坤益、陳財輝、楊政川(2001)木賊葉木麻黃原生種源之形態系統歸類。台灣林業科學 16(4):285-293。
  2. 何坤益、楊政川、鄧書麟、陳財輝(2004)應用ISSR解析山木麻黃國際種原之遺傳變異與種原關係。台灣林業科學 19(1):79-88。
  3. 陳述、陳成、范明仁、鄒箎生(1998)綠豆種原外形性狀遺傳歧異之地理分布。中華農業研究47:108-124。
  4. 陳財輝、潘冠良、廖天賜(2006)不同種源山木麻黃在台灣之初期生長表現。台灣林業科學21(4):357-367。
  5. 張德慈(1997)植物遺傳資源未來植物生產的關鍵。台灣省農業試驗所p. 24。
  6. 楊政川、張添榮、陳財輝、陳振榮(1995)木賊葉木麻黃在台灣之種原試驗І、種子重與苗木生長。林業試驗所研究報告季刊 10(2):195-207。
  7. Abrams, M. D., B. D. Kloeppel and M. E. Kubiske (1992) Ecophysiological and morphological responses to shade and drought in two contrasting ecotypes of Prunus serotina. Tree physiology. 10:343-355.
  8. Bauerle, W., T. H. Whitlow, T. L. Setter, T. L. Bauerle and F. M. Vermeylen (2003) Ecophysiology of Acer rubrum seedlings from contrasting hydrologic habitats: growth, gas exchange, tissue water relatios, abscissic acid and carbon isotope discrimination. Tree Physiology 23:841-850.
  9. Bruschi, P., G.. G.. Vendramin, F. Bussotti and P. Grossoni (2003) Morphological and molecular diversity among Italian populations of Quercus Petraea (Fagaceae). Annals of Botany 91:707-716.
  10. Danselman, H. M. and H. L. Flint (1982) Genecology of eastern redbud(Cercus canadensis). Ecology 63:962-971.
  11. Dvorak, W. S., H. Uruena, L. A. Moreno, and J. Goforth (1998) Provenance and family variation in Sterculia apetala in Colombia. Forest Ecology and Management 111:127-135.
  12. FAO(Food and Agriculture Organization) (1996) Report on the state of the workd’s plant genetic resources. Proc. International Technical Conference on Plant Genetic Resources. Leipzig, June 17-23.
  13. Hannerz, M., J. Sonesson and I. Ekberg (1999) Genetic correlations between growth and growth rhythm obseryed in a short-term test and performance in long-term field trials of Norway spruce. Can. J. For. Res. 29:768-778.
  14. Hodge, G. R. and W. S. Dvorak (2001) Genetic parameters and provenance variation of Pinus Caribaea Var. Hondurensis in 48 internation trials. Can. J. For. Res. 31:496-511.
  15. Johnson, R. A. and D. W. Wichern (2002) Applied multivariate statistical analysis. (5th ed). Prentice Hall, London p.668.
  16. Kristin, A. M., E. K. John, L. Z. George, E. S. Peter (2005) Rangewide provenance variation in Atlantic White-cedar (Chamaecyparis thyoides): Early survival and growth in New Jersey and North Carolina plantations. Forest Ecology and Management 216:91-104.
  17. Lucero, V. S., S. E. Mckeand, D. A. Huber, D. L. Rockwood and T. L. White (2002) Performance differences and genetic parameters for four coastal provenances of loblolly pine in the southeastern united states. Forest Science 48(4):732-742.
  18. Mantovan, N. G. (2002) Early growth differenatiation among Prosopis flexuosa D.C. provenances from the Monte phytogeographic province, Argentina. New Forests 23:19-30.
  19. Midgley, S. J., J. W. Turnbull and R. D. Johnston (1981) Casuarina ecology, management and utilization. Canberra: CSIRO. p.5.
  20. Mylecraine, K. A., E. K. John, L. Z. George and E. S. Peter (2005) Rangewide provenance variation in Atlantic White-cedar (Chamaecyparis thyoides) : Early survival and growth in New Jersey and North Carolina plantations. Forest Ecology and Management 216:91-104.
  21. Pinyopusarerk, K. and E. R. Williams (2000) Range-wide variation in growth and morphological characteristics of Casuarina equisetifolia grownin Northern Australia. Forest Ecology and management 134:219-232.
  22. Tognetti, R., M. Michelozzi and A. Giovannelli (1997) Geographical Variation in water relation, hydraulic architecture and terpene composition of Aleppo pine seedlings from Italian provenances. Tree Physiology 17:241-250.
  23. Williams, E. R., J. A. John and D. Whitaker (2006) Construction of resolvable spatial row-column designs. Biometric 62:103-108.
  24. 七、引用文獻
  25. 朱軍(1996)遺傳模型分析方法。中國農業出版社p.3。
  26. 仲崇禄、陳祖沛(1995)華南地區山地木麻黃引種試驗。廣東林業科技 11(3):46-49。
  27. 仲崇禄、施純淦、王維輝、洪長福(2002)華南地區山地木麻黃種源試驗與篩選。林業科學 38(6):58-65。
  28. 何坤益、王志斌、張怡萱(2003)不同種源木賊葉木麻黃在台灣(四湖)之物候調查。中華林學季刊 36(4):311-319。
  29. 李學勇(1988)族群遺傳學與生物演化。國立編譯館p.76。
  30. 李建霖、姜家華、潘富俊、王亞男(1999)台灣地區不同種源青剛櫟變異之研究。中華林業季刊 32(1):13-24。
  31. 李淵百(2002)計量遺傳學入門。國立編譯館p.161。
  32. 林清山(1988)多變項統計分析法。東華書局出版社347pp.。
  33. 林孟輝(2003)水稻耐旱性之遺傳研究。國立中興大學農藝學研究所博士論文85pp.。
  34. 林什全、仲崇禄、白嘉雨(2003)廣東省電白縣5年生山地木麻黃種源試驗及篩選。林業科學研究 16(4):506-510。
  35. 吳立德(2005)杉木對於葉枯病抗病感病之遺傳統計學研究。國立中興大學森林研究所碩士論文p.25。
  36. 俞新妥(1996)杉木種源試驗及地理變異。現代育林 11(3):41-48。
  37. 姜家華、王亞男、李振宇、姜保真、李明仁、胡大維、潘富俊、林世宗、吳文鑾(1999)林木遺傳與育種學。國立編譯館p.134。
  38. 姜金龍(1999)台灣野生仙草種內變異之研究。國立中興大學農藝學研究所博士論文p.63。
  39. 陳述(2000)綠豆種原遺傳歧異及核心收集之研究。國立臺灣大學農藝學研究所博士論文p.38。
  40. 陳述、陳成、范明仁(1997)種原的核心收集。科學農業 45:299-306。
  41. 翁仁憲(1996)作物之光合、呼吸及蒸散作用與其環境適應性之關係。中華農業氣象 3(1):1-7。
  42. 黃生(2000)生物族群的遺傳多樣性。生物多樣性保育講習選集。p.61。
  43. 葉功富、羅美娟、林金木(2004)短枝木麻黃在福建東山試點的種源試驗結果分析與選擇。北京林業大學學報 26(6):6-11。
  44. 廖天賜(1998)台灣赤楊生態生理之基礎研究。國立中興大學植物學研究所p.12。
  45. 劉棠瑞、蘇鴻傑(1997)森林植物生態學。台灣商務印書館p.5。
  46. 蘇宗振(2003)台灣薏苡種原農藝性狀變異及利用RAPD鑑別與親緣關係之研究。國立中興大學農藝學研究所博士論文p.58。
  47. Fahmy, I. A., M. Heikal and M. E. S. Iman (1970) A study on the timber yield of Casuarina spp. Agric Res Rev. 48(5):253-266.
  48. Hou, B. X., F. Lin, G. F. YU, Z. H. Chen, X. H. Z and S. M. Tao (2005) Study on law of flower and cone of Fokienia hodginsii provenance. Journal of Plant Genetic Resources 6(2):163-167.
  49. Kitzmiller, J. H. (2005) Provenance trials of Ponderosa pine in northern California. Forest Science 51(6):595-607.
  50. Phengpricha, N. (1977) Planting Casuarinas to become a millionaire. Vanasarn 35(4): 415-8.
  51. Pinyopusarerk, K. and D. J. Boland (1990) Casuarina junghuhniana-an Indonesian species of promise for the tropics. Advances in Casuarina research and utilization. Proceedings of the 2nd international Casuarina workshop, 15-20 January 1990, Desert development center, AUC., Cairo, Egypt p.202-212.
  52. Pinyopusarerk, K. (1995) International provenance trials of Casuarina junghuhniana operational manual. Canberra: CSIRO Divison of Forestry. p.13.
  53. Pinyopusarerk, K., S. J. Midgley and J. W. Turnbull (1996) Research and development. Proceedings of the 3rd International Casuarina Workshop. Canberra: CSIRO p23.
  54. Sengloung, R., N. Kamolpun, K. Lily, B. Suree and P. Damrong (2004) Provenance variation on growth performance and some floral biology of Casuarina junghniniana. Mia. Chachoensao, Thailand. Silvicultural research report. Bangkok: Department of Forestry.
  55. Shao, J. P., Y. F. Geng, X. D. Zuo, S. B. Bai and R. P. Qi (2003) Study of phenophase and growth rhythm of sequoia sempervirens of different provenance. Yunnan Forestry Science and Technology 104(3):14-19.
  56. Zas, R., E. Merlo, R. Diaz and J. F. López (2004) Relative growth trend as an early selection parameter in a Douglas-Fir provenance test. Forest Science 50(4): 518-526.