Plant Systematics and Evolution

, Volume 194, Issue 3–4, pp 189–205

Hybridisation, genomic constitution and generic delimitation inElymus s. l. (Poaceae: Triticeae)

  • M. Assadi
  • H. Runemark
Article

DOI: 10.1007/BF00982855

Cite this article as:
Assadi, M. & Runemark, H. Pl Syst Evol (1995) 194: 189. doi:10.1007/BF00982855

Abstract

Intergeneric crosses were made between representatives of the genomically-defined generaElymus, Agropyron, Elytrigia, Pseudoroegneria, andThinopyrum. The genomic constitution ofElytrigia repens, the type species ofElytrigia, is shown to be SSH, a genomic combination otherwise found only inElymus. The S genome ofPseudoroegneria has almost always a dominant influence on the morphology of the taxa of which it is a component.Wang (1989) showed that the J genome inThinopyrum and the S genome have considerable homoeology, with a mean c-value of 0.35 in diploid SJ hybrids. A genetic coherence from S to SJe, Je, JeJb, and Jb can be expected, agreeing with the continuous morphologic variation pattern observed. Because of the absence of morphological discontinuities between the taxa,Pseudoroegneria (S),Elymus (SH, SY, sometimes with additional genomes),Elytrigia (SSH, SSHX), andThinopyrum (SJ, SJJ, J) are best treated as a single genus,Elymus, following the generic concept ofMelderis in Flora Europaea and Flora of Turkey. The basic genomic constituents ofElymus will then be the S and/or J genomes.Agropyron, with diploids, tetraploids, and hexaploids based on the P genome is morphologically distinct from other genera inTriticeae. In a few species ofElymus andPseudoroegneria, a P genome is an additional constituent. In these cases the P genome has a negligible morphological influence. Therefore, it seems reasonable to maintainAgropyron as a separate genus.

Key words

Poaceae Triticeae Elymus Elytrigia Agropyron Pseudoroegneria Thinopyrum Lophopyrum Trichopyrum Hybridization genome analysis generic delimitation 

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. Assadi
    • 1
  • H. Runemark
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Systematic BotanyUniversity of LundLundSweden
  2. 2.Research Institute of Forests and RangelandsTehranIran

Personalised recommendations