American
Chestnut trees found in GA |
Will
Blozan |
Jul
01, 2006 08:22 PDT |
What the $#%^?
Trees like those described in NH are not hard to find down here.
A large
20-30 year old tree is not a resistant tree, just a lucky stump
sprout. It
is the same genetic material that was KILLED in the first place.
I think the
reporter meant to say "NORTHERN-most flowering
specimen..."
I cored a selection of chestnuts when I worked for the national
park service
and every one was approximately 38-43 years old at BH. Diameters
ranged from
2" to 16". Trees (3rd generation stump sprouts) older
than those in NH are
very common in the southern Appalachians. The largest trees like
the one I
climbed a few years ago to pollinate for the ACF are likely only
20-25 years
old.
I seriously don't understand the significant of the find. Can
anyone clue me
in?
Will
-----Original Message-----
From: edniz
Sent: Saturday, July 01, 2006 7:50 AM
Subject: Fw: American Chestnut trees found in GA
Hello,
Here is an
article from Yahoo news of finding healthy American
Chestnuts in New Hampshire:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060618/ap_on_sc/chestnut_trees
I received
another message from a friend of mine in Cooperative
Extension of a chestnut find in Georgia:
|
May
19, 2006" By Elliott Minor, Associated Press
ALBANY,
Ga." A stand of American chestnut trees that
somehow escaped a
blight that killed off nearly all their kind in the
early 1900s has been
discovered along a hiking trail not far from President
Franklin D.
Roosevelt's Little White House at Warm Springs.
The find has stirred excitement among those working to
restore the American chestnut,
and raised hopes that scientists might be able to use
the pollen
to breed hardier chestnut trees.
"There's something about this place that has
allowed them to endure the
blight," said Nathan Klaus, a biologist with the
Georgia Department of
Natural Resources who spotted the trees. "It's
either that these trees are
able to resist the blight, which is unlikely, or Pine
Mountain has
something unique that is giving these trees
resistance."...
"The
largest of the half-dozen or so trees is about 40 feet
tall and 20 to 30 years old, and is believed to be the
southernmost American chestnut discovered so far that is
capable of flowering and producing nuts..."
Source:
Associated Press |
Re:
American Chestnut trees found in GA |
Randy
Brown |
Jul
01, 2006 10:57 PDT |
Just as a tangential, off the cuff thought. How do we
know the
native virulence (excluding hypovirulence) of the blight
has remained
constant over time? The Chestnut's gene
pool may be 'frozen in
time' but the fungus isn't. Generally it's not in a
disease's best
interest to eliminate it's host.
As a example, the virulence of syphilis declined rapidly
in the human
population:
"The first well-recorded outbreak of what we know
as syphilis
occurred in Naples in 1494.... ...The
disease swept across Europe
from its early epicenter at Naples. The early form was
much more
virulent than the disease of today, the incubation
period was
shorter, only a few months, and the symptoms were more
severe. In
addition, the disease was more frequently fatal than it
is today. By
1546, the disease had evolved into the form we know
now."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syphilis_disease
Any thoughts?
|
RE:
American Chestnut trees found in GA- HUH??? |
Edward
Frank |
Jul
05, 2006 18:05 PDT |
Randy,
This is an interesting idea that I have not heard
discussed before: [the
virulence of the blight potentially may have changed
over time.] I don't
know what to say. Certainly the potential is there but I
am not sure
how rapidly the fungus involved may have evolved and am
not sure how to
test the hypothesis. Maybe someone else has some ideas.
A second question comes to mind concerning the
interaction of the blight
and the chestnut. Some of the trees were killed
completely - dead from
top to root. Others continue to sprout new shoots from
the roots 80
years later. They have survived in a fashion. So the
blight was not
100% deadly - just slightly less. You can see in some
plants, when
subject to grazing by insects or animals a change in
leaf chemistry
takes place. The first leaf may have be delicious, but
sibsequent
leaves may become progressively more distasteful or even
poisonous with
continued predation. There is a potential to produce
these chemicals in
the leaves, but it takes time for the plants to adapt to
exhibit the
characteristic. The death of these chestnut trees was
relatively rapid.
Perhaps they had a potential to resist the blight, but
because of the
speed of death, this potential was not able to be
developed or
exhibited. With the chestnut trees sprouting over and
over again, has
there been any change in the ability of the tree species
to resist
diseases like blight over time? Perhaps given time,
these resprouts,
the maximum potential of the tree to resist disease can
eventually be
realized, and the offspring of these trees could be more
resistant to
blight. I am not talking Lamarkian aquisition of traits,
but
development of a potential within the pre-exisitng gene
pool.
Comments?
Ed Frank
|
RE:
American Chestnut trees found in GA- HUH??? |
James
Smith |
Jul
05, 2006 20:01 PDT |
There must certainly be examples of diseases that have
managed to wipe
out the host populations. Just because it's not terribly
logical--even
in an implacable evolutionary way--doesn't mean that an
organisim
wouldn't capitalise on a host's weaknesses to completely
wipe them out.
I know almost nothing about the subject, but I would
assume that thing
like that have occurred over the course of the history
of life on Earth.
On the other hand, hasn't the balsam wooly adelgid shown
signs that it's
not as effective on the trees in the Smokies and Blacks?
Aren't the
newer generations of balsam trees coping with the
introduced pests? Or
is it merely because the adelgids prefer older trees? Or
did the
adelgids die off after the initial onslaught when almost
all of our
balsam forests were destroyed?
If the balsam trees are, indeed, showing more resistance
to the balsam
wooly adelgid, perhaps this bodes well for the eastern
and carolina
hemlock species. Perhaps after they are initially wiped
out, a newer
generation will be more likely to resist the pest.
Hasn't it been conjectured that a feline virus almost
wiped out the
cheetah? Haven't genetic tests shown that at some time
in the past the
breeding population of the entire species was reduced to
just a few
dozen individuals? If so, then that would be an example
of a disease
coming pretty darned close to completely wiping out a
host. |
RE:
American Chestnut trees found in GA- HUH??? |
wad-@comcast.net |
Jul
06, 2006 06:04 PDT |
ENTS
I have always felt that the chestnut would regain it's
glory sometime, because it did not die altogether. It
may build resistance over time, or the fungus may change
and become less powerful. I imagine these things take
hundreds, if not thousands of years. Although DNA does
mutate over time, I often think that a population is
whittled down to those that have the resistant DNA, and
then the species has to repopulate from that core group.
Similar to humans and the Black Plague.
The two trees I went to look at in SE Pa turned out to
be Chinese, or at least hybrids of some kind. The
gentleman from the Chestnut foundation took samples, and
will let me know. I thought the leaves looked to be
chinese, but the habit was single stem, which threw me
off. That and an owner swearing they were american.
Unless a Chestnut is found on the East Coast that is
over 75' tall, and has been injected with the fungus and
lived, I won't be convinced of any of these new
discoveries. I hope that it happens in my lifetime, and
I will continue to plant chestnuts each year.
Scott
|
Re:
RE: American Chestnut trees found in GA- HUH??? |
brown_-@colstate.edu |
Jul
06, 2006 08:16 PDT |
I recall seeing a chestnut with abundant sprouts 10-15
years ago in SE
PA
(unforunately the farmer has since expanded his pasture
and it is
gone).
However, that stump had several sprouts including one
about 15-16" dbh
that was producing mast. It also had numerous older
sprouts that were
dead but were generally smaller, in my recollection. It
seems possible
that the stump-sprouts were getting larger over time for
whatever
reason.
Roger Brown
|
RE:
American Chestnut Resistance |
Edward
Frank |
Jul
06, 2006 19:35 PDT |
Roger, James, Scott, everyone,
All of this talk of the American Chestnut recovery is
still just speculation
on my part. The possibility that these things are
happening is there, but
there is no real evidence that any of this has actually
or is actually
taking place.
We don't know if the blight has or has not changed in
virulence. Evolution
in lower organisms like fungi and bacteria is very
rapid. We could have
had thousands of generations of the blight since its
introduction. The
point that it isn't good for an organism to kill its
host is true to a
degree. If the disease spreads to another target before
the host dies then
it just lowers the spreading rate but does not break the
cycle. This was
an introduced organism, and in its native habitat it
does not kill the trees
because of their natural resistance. Then if it is
introduced into a
different environment with little to no resistance, the
blight could kill
all of its hosts before a chance to evolve into a less
resistant variety
occurs. Killing the host would be a misdirection as the
organism first
evolved - how could it establish itself effectively to
spread the initial
mutation?- but once it has evolved and is introduced
into a different
population, that restraint is gone. It would be the
typical boom and bust
population growth pattern. The boom spreads across the
entire population,
then with the bust all of the host trees die and the
blight population is
trivial until a mature tree grows for it to infect. I
would be more
optimistic of the American chestnut developing a
genetically resistant
strain if a small percentage of the mature trees
initially infected had
survived. I don't know of any at all that survived
beyond the root sprouts.
There may be been several genetic strains introduced at
once, rather than a
single strain. That would make it harder for resistance
to develop or for
the organism itself to mutate or evolve into a less
virulent strain. We are
better at epidemiology now that we were back in the
twenties. It may have
been done already, but I would be interested in seeing a
detailed analysis
of the spread of the blight using modern computer
modeling techniques. It
may be difficult because I am not sure all of the
necessary infection data
was collected in a useful format for the models.
Say there was more than one strain of blight, each tree
could be infected by
more than one strain. Alternatively if there were an
evolution of a strain,
each tree could be infected by both descendents of the
original strain and
the evolved strain. If the infection pattern was random,
then the greatest
differentiation of the individual strains would be in
areas farthest from
the initial infection in terms of physical distance and
time of infection.
(This pattern is the same structure as occurs in various
random walk
groundwater contamination flow models). Samples of the
blight from infected
sprouts from different areas of the range of the blight
and chestnut could
be genetically analyzed to see if there is any
difference. If there has
been some shift genetically in the American chestnut
(unlikely), or if the
ones sprouting new growths are similar to each other and
different from the
initial stock genetically, that also could be
determined. There are
chestnut trees growing outside the former native range
of the American
chestnut that could be sampled for a base of the
original population. The
national champion is growing in Washington state.
The analogy with the human disease is flawed to a degree
- not as a starting
point for consideration - but as far as the disease
spreads. In the human
infection an individual is likely to have been infected
by a single strain
and then passes on that same strain. Not always, but
commonly. Thus any
change in virulence would be passed on and preserved. A
tree may be exposed
over and over again to a variety of different strains
(if any) and then
these are passed on indiscriminately to oath trees. A
less virulent strain
would not be any more likely to be passed on to other
trees, over a deadly
one, unless it was the only strain present. The process
is less selective
and less likely to rapidly evolve a less deadly strain.
Again given random
infection spread from tree to tree, the trees farthest
away would be most
likely to have a blight monoculture, if multiple strains
were present.
Just rambling on...
Ed Frank
|
Re:
American Chestnut trees found in GA- HUH??? |
Randy
Brown |
Jul
06, 2006 19:35 PDT |
Ed,
I guess the reason I asked is the renewed efforts to
find chestnuts
has turned up quite a few trees. 20-30-40 years old.
For example:
http://www2.vscc.cc.tn.us/jschibig/resurrectingthechestnut.htm
(Scott: They claim tree from Adair County is old enough
to have
survived the initial wave)
If memory serves, Kentucky and Tennessee were completely
blighted by
1940's. So If one had looked in 60's
& 70's
would one have found a similar number of surviving young
trees? Or
is it simply a matter of finding more trees then we
expected
simply because we are finally bothering to look?
Another factoid that got me thinking in this direction
is the
difficulty with introducing hypovirulence because of the
diversity
of the fungus here in America vs Europe. Begs the
question whether
this diversity arose on this continent or whether the
many
different strains were introduced multiple times. This
link seems to
suggest it may have been introduced multiple times
http://www.caes.state.ct.us/FactSheetFiles/PlantPathology/fspp008f.htm
Perhaps this is just an academic question now, but
looking down the
road when the various breading programs introduce
resistant trees back into the wild, it then falls into
our hands to
determine how much genetic diversity we are going to
preserve.
I have a hard time believing that the introduced
resistants and the
susceptible native population will interbreed
significantly
because the susceptible trees flower so rarely. At the
same time, I
don't see how the susceptible trees can persist
when faced with the competition from the resistant
trees.
The ACF is looking to expand its breeding program so
that each state
can breed it's own regional varieties. It's a nice step,
but how do we know when to draw the line? 3-4
exceptionally
resistant trees per region? Or a large pool of perhaps
dozens of
not-so-resistant trees just to cover the unknowns and
perhaps rely on
natural biological trends to fill the resistance gap?
Just some idle speculative, and perhaps ignorant
questions.
Randy
|
RE:
American Chestnut trees found in GA- HUH??? |
Matthew
Hannum |
Jul
08, 2006 11:18 PDT |
In the long run, assuming that the ACF's trees succeed
and are able to
begin repopulating the woods with blight-resistant
chestnuts on their
own, I think it will fall to nature to decide what
happens to whatever
chestnuts that remain before the blight. Once enough
blight-resistant
genetic material is introduced, the non-resistant trees
will vanish over
the years from competition, but I don't see any way to
prevent this, nor
am I sure it would make much of a difference provided
that there are
enough variations of the blight resistant trees out
there and that they
can spread on their own through the woods while
maintaining that
resistance.
The blight may change and throw a wrench in the plans of
course, but
nobody really knows how that would work out, though I do
agree that it
is not an evolutionary improvement for the blight to
mutant into new
lethal forms. I suspect in the long run we'll have less
lethal blight
and blight resistant trees, although the non-resistant
trees that have
survived to this day may never amount to much of
anything after catching
the blight.
|
Re:
American Chestnut trees found in GA- HUH??? |
Jess
Riddle |
Jul
10, 2006 07:27 PDT |
Ed,
As far as I know, the survival of some chestnut root
systems and not
other is entirely environmental. Root systems that do
not produce
sprouts typically occur on heavily shaded sites. The
shade usually
comes from a thick heath shurb layer or from the
multi-layered canopy
of a cove forest. A soil organism, I don't know the
name, protects
the roots of chestnut from the blight. Perhaps the
patterns of sprout
survival are different in other parts of the country,
but the above
patterns are fairly consistent in the southeast.
The potential for a delayed chemical response is
interesting and one I
had not considered before. However, I think that kind of
resistance
is unlikely. First, that building response to attack
would have a
genetic base and have to have evolved as a response to
some
environmental pressure. Maybe some other fungus would
have supplied
that effective pressure, but in that case it seems like
someone should
have noticed the response before. Second, I think that
chemical
response usually involves herbaceous plants or the
herbaceous parts of
woody plants. A tree responding in that fashion would
lose a huge
energy investment, the trunk, and access to resources. A
faster
response would allow much greater reproduction and hence
be selected
for. Third, the tree while only partially infected would
have much
greater resources to fight back with than a new sprout
drawing on
energy reserves stored in the roots. I'm just
speculating here, and
don't know if the process occurs in reality.
Jess Riddle
|
|
|