Selection of pest and disease resistant, high-yielding
shrub willows (Salix spp.) for biomass production from
novel species hybrid pedigrees
Kim Cameron1, Larry Abrahamson2, Tim Volk2, and Larry Smart1
1Cornell University, NYS Ag Experiment Station, Geneva, NY; 2SUNY-ESF, Syracuse, NY
Cornell University
New York State Ag Experiment Station
Willow versus Poplar
• Willow has greater genetic
diversity
• Willow has shorter
generation time
• Willow is generally easier to
root
• Willow easily hybridizes
• More genomic information
is available for poplar
• Poplar can be easily
transformed
Goals for Breeding and Selection of Willow Varieties
• Increased yield
• Long-term viability
• Number of stems
• Ease of establishment
• Improved conversion yield
Generalized Willow Breeding Strategy
Breeding Population
Many diverse individuals of
10-15 species
Molecular
Techniques
ongoing
Nursery screening
Select parents for breeding
Many crosses;
Single-plant plots
2-3 years
Select, propagate
Replicated,
multi-plant plots
Select
2-4 years
Yield
Trials
Over 600 Accessions collected to provide genetic diversity
• S. eriocephala
S. nigra
S. purpurea
other Salix spp.
Also . . .
S. lucida, S. discolor, S. cordata, S. sericea,
S. interior, S. amygdaloides, S. bebbiana, S.
petiolaris, S. viminalis, S. sachalinensis, S.
alba, S. dasyclados, S. matsudana, S.
miyabeana, S. integra . . .
Susceptibility to beetle damage
is used as a criteria for parental selection
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
3
59
S. eriocephala
Exotic
3
3
S. bebbiana
7
S. discolor
36
S. sachelinensis
2
S. miyabeana
0.0
S. purpurea
0.1
S. integra
Survey of Damage (weighted score)
Tully Field Station, 2005
Native
1
4
5
Exotic
S. eriocephala
S. purpurea
S. sachalinensis
0
0.1
0.0
2
1
4
Exotic
Native
Across multiple yield trials, 2006-2009
5
S. eriocephala
2
0.2
S. purpurea
1
0.3
S. sachalinensis
2
0.4
S. miyabeana
3
Survey of Damage (weighted score)
Beetle damage
Rust incidence
S. miyabeana
Incidence of Rust (average score)
Native species of willow display higher
susceptibility to pests and diseases
Native
Many Swedish and UK varieties are
debilitated by potato leafhopper
Photo by: Steve Brown, UGA
Establishment year S. viminalis
‘Torhild’ in midseason
‘Jorr’ in mid-season
Intra- and interspecific hybrids have been produced
Compilation of results from US, Canadian, and European breeding programs
Subgenus Vetrix
Intra- and interspecific crosses are
possible across many species of willow
Maternal Parent
S. purpurea
Helix
S. miyabeana
Viable seed produced
No seed produced
Paternal Parent
S. purpurea
S. integra
Helix
S. purpurea x S. integra
S. miyabeana
S. purpurea x S. miyabeana
S. sachalinensis
S. viminalis
Viminella
Some hybrids appear to be sterile
Maternal Parent
S. sachalinensis
x S. miyabeana
S. viminalis
x S. miyabeana
Viable seed produced
No seed produced
Paternal Parent
S. purpurea
S. integra
Helix
S. purpurea x S. integra
S. miyabeana
S. purpurea x S. miyabeana
S. sachalinensis
S. viminalis
Viminella
Intraspecific and Interspecific Hybridizations
F1 and F2
S. purpurea
S. eriocephala
S. miyabeana
S. sachalinensis x S. miyabeana
S. purpurea x S. integra
S. purpurea x S. miyabeana
Multi-generation hybrids
F1
S. integra
S. viminalis
S. cordata
S. nigra
S. sachalinensis
S. cordata x S. eriocephala
S. purpurea x S. eriocephala
S. purpurea x S. sachalinensis
S. purpurea x S. gilgiana
S. viminalis x S. miyabeana
S. viminalis x S. eriocephala
S. dasyclados x S. miyabeana
S. dasyclados x S. eriocephala
S. dasyclados x S. viminalis
S. eriocephala x S. purpurea
S. matsudana x S. alba
S. sachalinensis x S. eriocephala
S. sericea x S. purpurea
S. sericea x S. eriocephala
S. sericea x S. sachalinensis
S. discolor x S. cinerea
S. discolor x S. eriocephala
S. viminalis x (S. sachalinensis x S. miyabeana)
S. viminalis x (S. purpurea x S. miyabeana)
S. viminalis x (S. viminalis x S. miyabeana)
S. purpurea x (S. sachalinensis x S. miyabeana)
S. purpurea x (S. purpurea x S. miyabeana)
S. purpurea x (S. viminalis x S. miyabeana)
(S. sachalinensis x S. miyabeana) x S. purpurea
(S. sachalinensis x S. miyabeana) x S. miyabeana
(S. sachalinensis x S. miyabeana) x S. viminalis
(S. viminalis x S. schwerinii) x S. cinerea
(S. sachalinensis x S. miyabeana) x (S. purpurea x S. miyabeana)
(S. sachalinensis x S. miyabeana) x (S. viminalis x (S. schwerinii x S. viminalis))
Flow Cytometric Estimation of Nuclear DNA Content
DNA Content
Sample
Size
Reported
S. purpurea
S. viminalis
S. miyabeana
S. sachalinensis
5
3
1
2x (R, T); 3x (N)
2x (H)
4x (N)
4x (N)
2x
0.95 0.012
4x
4x
1.61 0.004
1.65
-
S. purpurea x S. miyabeana
S. viminalis x S. miyabeana
3
2
4x (N)
4x (N)
3x
3x
1.32 0.001
1.36
-
Species
Estimated
(pg/2C)
Ploidy Mean SE
S. sachalinensis x S. miyabeana
1
4x (N)
4x
1.67
Reported ploidy levels: H = Häkansson (1955); R = Rechinger (1964); T = Thibault
(1998); N = Ngantcha (2010; thesis)
1999 Family Screening Trial - Syracuse
Mean total stem area (cm2) by family
Two years post-coppice measurements of ~2500 plants
bar=family mean
=best individual
TOTAL STEM AREA
Family mean and max
Family ID
Variety Selection Trials – Three plot designs
2001 Selection Trial - Tully, NY and Rhinelander, WI
• 25 clones (16 bred in 1998)
• 3 randomized blocks per site
• 40-plant plots, double-row spacing (0.6 x 0.76 x 1.5 m)
• Harvested every 3 years (WI trial was abandoned)
2002 Selection Trial - Tully, NY
• 86 clones (82 bred in 1999)
• 4-plant plots, 0.6 x 0.9 m spacing
• 8 randomized blocks
• Harvested every 2 years
2008 Selection Trials - Tully, NY and Geneva, NY
• 76 clones (57 bred in 2001, 2002, or 2005)
• 24-plant plots, double-row spacing (0.6 x 0.76 x 1.5 m)
• 3 randomized blocks per site
• To be harvested every 3 years
01
05X-27
05X-281-00
05X-281-069
X-2 1- 8
9 07
0199231-051
X
01 269-010
05X-265-025
X-2 6- 0
8 01
0599201-046
01X-297-013
X-2 1- 8
64 049
-03
02
X
05 -32 SX63
X
6
05 -29 -017
05X-281-005
05X-297-016
X- 5- 3
99281-011
11 06
3-0 4
1
05 98 SX62
X
05 -2771-31
X-2 9- 1
9 08
0599215-020
X-2 7- 0
0 8 01
02 1-201-055
05X-320-001
05X-286-011
05X-281-030
X-2 7- 4
87 089
-09
05
01X-27 SX66
X
05 -265-024
05X-294-026
05X-278-014
05X-286-059
05X-291-067
01X-279-010
05X-266-066
05X-275-011
05X-279-079
05X-275-024
05X-296-074
05X-278-036
05X-298-058
X-2 7- 7
78 028
-07
05
X
05 -29 SV1
X
5
05 -27 -011
05X-296-064
X-2 2- 5
9 04
05 05-05-012
02X-281-005
05X-321-062
05X-294-006
05X-285-011
05X-297-033
01X-293-043
05X-263-027
X-2 5- 1
0
01 98-027
-01 35
05 98 03
X-2 82 2
92 -34
95035
05
02
X
05 -27 S26
05X-298-005
05X-299-045
05X-299-045
X-2 1- 4
98 021
-00
05
X
05 27 P63
X-2 8- 3
0
00 78-073
01-01-016
-0 8
05 01-07-258
X-2 3- 2
93 201
-05
3
2
Cross Sectional Area (cm )
2008 Genetic Selection Trial
Selection
First2008
year
postTrial
coppice
Geneva, NY
1st year post-coppice
160
140
18 clones performed better than ‘SX61’
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
S. viminalis x (S. sachalinensis x S. miyabeana)
S. purpurea x S. miyabeana
S. purpurea
S. viminalis x S. miyabeana
S. miyabeana
Species are color-coded
(S. sachalinensis x S. miyabeana) x
(S. viminalis x S. sachalinensis x S. viminalis)
S. sachalinensis
Average stem area of top five clones compared
to ‘SX61’ in each selection trial
First year post coppice results
Mean of Top 5 Clones
Reference clone (SX61)
Mean Stem Area Plant-1
18
19%
16
14
12
86%
10
8
6
11%
4
2
0
2001
2002
2008
Tully, NY
Tully,
NY
Trial
Geneva, NY
Cr
ee
k
On SV1
on
da
ga
Mi
llb
ro
ok
94
00
1
On
eid
a
Ow
as
co
SX
61
All
eg
an
y
O
Tu
ne
lly
on
ta
Ch
am
pio
n
Ot
isc
o
98
37
-77
Sh
erb
ur
ne
Ca
na
sto
ta
S2
5
SX
64
98
32
-49
Fis
h
Oven Dry Tonnes ha-1
2005 Yield Trials – Belleville & Tully
40
Belleville
Tully
• Dry biomass yield at third-year harvest
50
Belleville
Tully
30
20
10
0
First rotation yield across two
trials established in 2005
Mean of the top 5 clones:
12 dry tonnes ha-1 yr-1
Mean of the top 5 clones:
10.5 dry tonnes ha-1 yr-1
16
Belleville Yield Trial
Tully Yield Trial
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Fis
h
On Cre
on ek
da
94 ga
All 001
eg
an
y
M i SV
llb 1
r
On ook
On eida
eo
Tu
lly Ow nta
Ch as
am co
p
Ot ion
isc
SX o
98 61
37
-77
S
2
9
Sh 832- 5
e
4
Ca rbur 9
na ne
sto
t
SX a
6
4
Fis
hC
On re
on ek
da
94 ga
All 001
eg
an
y
M i SV
llb 1
r
On ook
On eida
eo
Tu
lly Ow nta
Ch as
am co
p
Ot ion
isc
S o
98 X61
37
-77
9 S2
Sh 832- 5
e
4
Ca rbur 9
na ne
sto
t
SX a
64
Dry tonnes ha-1 yr-1
14
S. purpurea
S. x dasyclados
S. purpurea x S. miyabeana
S. viminalis x S. miyabeana
S. sachalinensis
S. eriocephala
S. sachalinensis x S. miyabeana
S. miyabeana
Onh Cr
on eek
da
g
All 9400a
eg 1
an
Mi S y
llb V 1
r
On o o k
On eid
Tu
lly Oweonta
Ch as a
am co
p
Ot i o n
is
SXco
98 61
37
-77
S
Sh 9832 25
e
Ca rbu 49
n a rn e
sto
SX ta
64
Fis
h
On Cre
on ek
da
94 ga
All 00
eg 1
an
Mi SVy
llb 1
r
On ook
On eid
Tu
e a
lly Ow onta
Ch as
am co
p
Ot ion
isc
SX o
98 61
37
-77
9 S
Sh 832 25
e -4
Ca rbur 9
na ne
sto
SX ta
64
Fis
Weighted Beetle Damage
Damage associated with beetle feeding
across two yield trials 2006-2009
0.8
Belleville Yield Trial
S. purpurea
S. x dasyclados
S. purpurea x S. miyabeana
S. viminalis x S. miyabeana
Tully Yield Trial
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
S. sachalinensis
S. eriocephala
S. sachalinensis x S. miyabeana
S. miyabeana
Fis
h
On Cre
on ek
da
94 ga
All 001
eg
an
y
Mi SV
llb 1
r
On ook
On eida
eo
Tu
lly Ow nta
Ch as
am co
p
Ot ion
isc
SX o
98 61
37
- 77
9 S2
Sh 832- 5
e
4
Ca rbur 9
na ne
st o
t
SX a
6
4
Fis
hC
On re
on ek
da
94 ga
All 001
eg
an
y
Mi SV
llb 1
r
On ook
On eida
eo
Tu
lly Ow nta
Ch a s
am co
p
Ot ion
isc
S o
98 X61
37
- 77
S
2
9
Sh 832- 5
e
4
Ca rbur 9
na ne
st o
t
SX a
64
Weighted Average
Incidence of Rust
across two yield trials 2006-2009
5
Belleville Yield Trial
S. purpurea
S. x dasyclados
S. purpurea x S. miyabeana
S. viminalis x S. miyabeana
Tully Yield Trial
4
3
2
1
0
S. sachalinensis
S. eriocephala
S. sachalinensis x S. miyabeana
S. miyabeana
La
Fa
ye
tte
YT
Sh
er
'9
id
7
an
YT
'9
Tu
8
lly
Pe
YT
te
'9
r 's
3
Tr
ac
W
t'
ol
98
co
tt
B
YT
ur
lin
'9
gt
8
on
C
YT
an
as
'9
7
to
ta
YT
M
as
'9
se
8
na
YT
'9
Tu
3
lly
YT
B
el
'0
le
5
vi
lle
YT
'0
5
Dried Mg ha-1 yr-1
Comparison of top 5 clones in trials established between
1993 and 2005
40
30
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
SV1
20
10
0
Future directions for willow breeding
Develop genomic resources that will aid in breeding
Screen for traits of
interest such as cold
tolerance, drought
tolerance, nitrogen use
efficiency and conversion
efficiency
Continued screening for
increased yield, pest and disease resistance, and form
Many thanks to all my collaborators!
Dr. Greg Loeb
Dr. Shawn Kenaley
Dr. Michelle Serapiglia
Dennis Rak
Ken Burns
Many, many undergrads
Photo by Ben Ballard
http://willow.cals.cornell.edu/