Plant Systematics and Evolution

, Volume 145, Issue 1–2, pp 135–153 | Cite as

The origin ofSenecio vulgaris (Asteraceae)

  • Joachim W. Kadereit
Article

Abstract

Senecio vulgaris L. (2n = 40) is suggested to be of autotetraploid origin fromS. vernalisWaldst. & Kit. (2n = 20). This conclusion is based on results obtained from experimental hybridisations and cytological observations, and the consideration of morphological affinities, patterns of geographical distribution and hybrid formation under natural conditions. The morphological differences between the two species are related to a difference in the breeding system. WhilstS. vernalis is self-incompatible,S. vulgaris is self-compatible and strongly self-pollinating. Equally, other self-pollinating taxa traditionally associated withS. vulgaris are shown to have evolved independently from outbreeding relatives. Within a narrow frame of relationship, annual weeds have evolved in different cytotaxonomic circumstances.

Key words

Angiosperms Asteraceae Senecio vulgaris S. vernalis Autotetraploidy self-compatibility annual weeds 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Afzelius, K., 1924: Embryologische und zytologische Studien inSenecio und verwandten Gattungen. — Acta Horti Bergiani8, 123–219.Google Scholar
  2. Alexander, J. C. M., 1975: Experimental taxonomy in some annual species ofSenecio from the Mediterranean area. — Ph.D. Thesis, University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
  3. —, 1979: Mediterranean species ofSenecio sectionSenecio andDelphinifolius. — Notes Royal Bot. Gard. Edinburgh37, 387–428.Google Scholar
  4. Baker, H. G., 1967: The evolution of weedy taxa in theEupatorium microstemon aggregate. — Taxon16, 293–300.Google Scholar
  5. Battandier, J. A., Trabut, L. C., 1888: Flore de l'Algerie. — Alger: A. Jourdan, Paris: F. Savy.Google Scholar
  6. Black, J. M., 1957: Flora of South Australia4. Ed. 2. — Adelaide: K. M. Stevenson.Google Scholar
  7. Boissier, 1875: Flora Orientalis3. — Genevae et Basileae: H. Georg.Google Scholar
  8. Brenan, J. P. M., 1948:Senecio squalidus L. ×vulgaris L. — Rep. Bot. Soc. Exch. Club Br. Isl.13, 364.Google Scholar
  9. Briggs, D., 1978: Genecological studies of salt tolerance in groundsel (Senecio vulgaris L.) with particular reference to roadside habitats. — New Phytol.81, 381–389.Google Scholar
  10. Campbell, J. M., Abbott, R. J., 1976: Variability of outcrossing frequency inSenecio vulgaris L. — Heredity36, 267–274.Google Scholar
  11. Candolle, A. P. de, 1838: Prodromus Systematis Naturalis Regni Vegetabilis6. — Paris.Google Scholar
  12. Chater, A. O., Walters, S. M., 1976:Senecio. — InTutin, T. G. & al., (Eds.): Flora Europaea4. — Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Cheeseman, T. F., 1906: Manual of the New Zealand Flora. — Wellington: J. Mackay.Google Scholar
  14. Clarke, C. B., 1876:Compositae Indicae. — Calcutta: Thacker, Spink & Co.Google Scholar
  15. Crisp, P. C., 1972: Cytotaxonomic studies in the SectionAnnui ofSenecio. — Ph.D. Thesis, University of London.Google Scholar
  16. Dostál, J., 1958: Klič k úplné květeně ČSR. — Praha.Google Scholar
  17. Druce, G. C., 1886: The Flora of Oxfordshire. — Oxford and London: Parker.Google Scholar
  18. Ellenberg, H., 1978: Vegetation Mitteleuropas mit den Alpen in ökologischer Sicht. 2. Aufl. — Stuttgart: E. Ulmer.Google Scholar
  19. Favarger, C., 1967: Cytologie et distribution des plantes. — Biol. Rev.42, 163–206.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Feekes, W., 1936: De ontwikkeling van de natuurlijke vegetatie in de Wieringermeerpoller. — Amsterdam: Mulder & Zn.Google Scholar
  21. Fiori, A., 1927: Nuova Flora Analitica D'Italia2. — Firenze: M. Ricci.Google Scholar
  22. Gibbs, P. E., 1971: Studies on synthetic hybrids of British species ofSenecio. 1.S. viscosus L. ×S. vulgaris L. — Trans. Proc. Bot. Soc. Edinb.41, 213–218.Google Scholar
  23. Godwin, H., 1975: The History of the British Flora. Ed. 2. — Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Grant, V., 1981: Plant speciation. Ed. 2. — Columbia: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Hálacsy, E. de, 1902: Conspectus Florae Graecae2. — Lipsiae: W. Engelmann.Google Scholar
  26. Hance, H. F., 1868: Three new ChineseAsteraceae. — J. Bot.6, 173–175.Google Scholar
  27. Harland, S. L., 1954: The genusSenecio as a subject for cytogenetical investigation. — Proc. Bot. Soc. Brit. Isl.1, 256–257.Google Scholar
  28. Harvey, W. H., Sonder, O. W., 1865: Flora Capensis3. — Dublin: Hodges Smith & Co.Google Scholar
  29. Hegi, G., 1928: Illustrierte Flora von Mittel-Europa6(2). — München: J. F. Lehmann.Google Scholar
  30. Hoffmann, O., 1894:Compositae. — InEngler, A., Prantl, K., (Eds.): Die natürlichen Pflanzenfamilien4(5). — Leipzig: W. Engelmann.Google Scholar
  31. Hooker, J. D., 1881: Flora of British India3. — London: L. Reeve & Co.Google Scholar
  32. Hylander, N., 1955: List of the plants of N. W. Europe. — Lund: C. W. K. Gleerup.Google Scholar
  33. Ingram, R., 1977: Synthesis of the hybridSenecio squalidus L. ×S. vulgaris f.radiatus Hegi. — Heredity39, 171–173.Google Scholar
  34. —, 1978: The genomic relationship ofSenecio squalidus L. andSenecio vulgaris L. and the significance of genomic balance in their hybridS. ×baxteri Druce. — Heredity40, 459–462.Google Scholar
  35. —, 1980: New evidence concerning the origin of inland radiate groundsel,S. vulgaris L. var.hibernicus Syme. — New Phytol.84, 543–546.Google Scholar
  36. Jacobasch, E., 1894:S. vulgaris L. undS. vernalis W. K. sind nur Endglieder zweier Entwicklungsreihen einer Urform. — Verh. Bot. Ver. Prov. Brandenb.36, 78–87.Google Scholar
  37. Jeffrey, C., 1979: Generic and sectional limits inSenecio (Compositae) II. Evaluation of some recent studies. — Kew Bull.34, 49–58.Google Scholar
  38. —, 1977: Generic and sectional limits inSenecio (Compositae) I. Progress report. — Kew Bull.32, 47–67.Google Scholar
  39. Kent, D. H., 1956:Senecio squalidus L. in the British Isles. 1. Early records (to 1877). — Proc. Bot. Soc. Br. Isl.2, 115–118.Google Scholar
  40. Kunkel, G., 1972: Enumeracion de las plantas vasculares de Gran Canaria. — Las Palmas: Monographiae Biologicae Canariensis3.Google Scholar
  41. Lojacono, M., 1903: Flora Sicula2 (1). — Palermo: L. Pedone.Google Scholar
  42. Lange, J., 1886: Haandbog i den danske Flora. — Kjobenhavn: C. A. Reitzel.Google Scholar
  43. Leslie, A. C., 1978:Senecio squalidus L. ×S. vulgaris L. in Cambridgeshire. — Watsonia12, 155–156.Google Scholar
  44. Lindmann, C. A. M., 1926: Svensk Phanerogamenflora. — Stockholm: P. A. Nordstedt & Söners.Google Scholar
  45. Maire, R., 1923: Contributions à l'étude de la flore de l'Afrique du Nord. — Bull. Soc. Hist. Nat. Afr. Nord14, 118–159.Google Scholar
  46. Marshall, D. F., Abbott, R. J., 1982: Polymorphism for outcrossing frequency at the ray floret locus inSenecio vulgaris L. I. Evidence. — Heredity48, 227–235.Google Scholar
  47. Mullenders, W., 1967: Flore de la Belgique, du Nord de la France et des regions voisines. — Liège: Desoer.Google Scholar
  48. Ooststroom, S. J. van, 1973: Flora van Nederland. Ed. 7. — Groningen: Wolters-Noordhoff.Google Scholar
  49. Perring, F. H., Sell, P. D., 1968: Critical Supplement to the Atlas of the British Flora. — London: T. Nelson & Sons.Google Scholar
  50. Rogerson, C. T., 1978: North American Flora2(10). — New York Botanical Garden.Google Scholar
  51. Rosser, E. M., 1955: A new british species ofSenecio. — Watsonia3, 228–232.Google Scholar
  52. Schinz, H., Keller, R., 1914: Flora der Schweiz2. 3. Aufl. — Zürich: A. Raustein.Google Scholar
  53. Sennen, E. C., 1921: À propos de quelque plantes rare. — Bull. Soc. Bot. Fr.68, 402–408.Google Scholar
  54. —, 1925: La garrigue du littoral, depuis Montpellier jusqu'à Sagunto. — Bull. Soc. Bot. Fr.72, 92–114.Google Scholar
  55. Stace, C. A., 1977: The origin of radiateSenecio vulgaris L. — Heredity39, 383–388.Google Scholar
  56. Stebbins, G. L., 1971: Chromosomal Evolution in Higher Plants. — London: E. Arnold.Google Scholar
  57. Sylven, N., 1907: Zwei im Bergianischen Garten im Sommer 1906 gefundeneSenecio-Hybriden. — Acta Horti Bergiani4 (3), 1–8.Google Scholar
  58. Szafer, W., 1953: Rosliny Polskie. — Warszawa.Google Scholar
  59. Trow, A. H., 1912: On the inheritance of certain characters in the Common Groundsel —Senecio vulgaris L. — and its segregates. — J. Genet.2, 239–276.Google Scholar
  60. Uechtritz, R. von, 1874: Floristische Bemerkungen. — Öst. Bot. Z.24, 242.Google Scholar
  61. Weimarck, H., 1963: Skånes Flora. — Lund: Corona AB.Google Scholar
  62. Weir, J., Ingram, R., 1980: Ray morphology and cytological aspects ofS. cambrensis Rosser. — New Phytol.86, 237–241.Google Scholar
  63. Zabel, H., 1869: Kleine botanische Mitteilungen. 1. ZweiSenecio-Varietäten. — Verh. Bot. Ver. Prov. Brandenb.11, 138–140.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1984

Authors and Affiliations

  • Joachim W. Kadereit
    • 1
  1. 1.Institut für Systematische Botanik und PflanzengeographieHeidelbergGermany

Personalised recommendations