Testing source elevation versus genotype as predictors of sugar pine performance in a post‐fire restoration planting

Abstract

AbstractClimate change is motivating a reassessment of how seeds are selected for reforestation, as rapid environmental change can lead to local maladaptation in trees. Genetic association studies and past seed source climate both have the potential to help identify appropriate planting stock, but these techniques have not been compared and tested as part of an operational planting program. In this study, we combined an analysis of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) associated with environmental gradients in sugar pine (Pinus lambertiana) with an analysis of post‐fire seedling survival and growth in a restoration experiment. Our genotype–environment association (GEA) tests of 92 individuals from varying climates within CA revealed 829 SNPs (out of 300,604) with significant association with climate gradients, especially April snowpack. Of these, 323 either had annotations that suggested potential functional importance or were identified by two different methods. We then built Bayesian models of survival and growth for all seedlings in a separate post‐fire planting experiment, to test the relative predictive ability of source elevation (a common proxy for source climate) versus the proportion of seedling alleles expected to be locally advantageous based on GEA. Across three sites within the King Fire scar in Eldorado National Forest in 2017, 2018, and 2019, 1774 seedlings were planted. Of these, 206 had enough green needles in 2020 to allow sample collection, and 161 were successfully genotyped. We found that source elevation was generally better at predicting seedling performance than genotype indices, perhaps because of the limited scope of the association analysis. Seed sources from 500 to 1800 ft (152.4–548.6 m) lower in elevation, and one seed zone further south generally performed as well or better than local seed sources. This result, and those of similar previous studies, suggest that “climate matching” using past climate information for existing seed sourcing units is a reasonable starting point for finding seedlings suited to already‐altered planting site climate conditions. However, further tests with more extensive genomic and performance data may improve the utility of genotype information for seed selection.