Plant Systematics and Evolution

, Volume 191, Issue 3–4, pp 147–160 | Cite as

Self-fertility and associated flower head traits in the Iberian taxa ofLactuca and related genera (Asteraceae: Lactuceae)

  • José A. Mejías


Sexual reproduction is the main reproduction mechanism among the 14 wild Iberian taxa ofLactuca, Prenanthes, Cicerbita, andMycelis. High levels of self-fertilization occur inLactuca, as well as facultative and obligate xenogamy. Xenogamy is strongly correlated with large capitula having blue or bright yellow colouration, high P/O ratios, and long anthesis, whereas self-fertilization is correlated with smaller capitula having pale yellow colouration, small P/O ratios, and short anthesis. Large variations occur in P/O index among taxa showing similar fertilization mechanism, probably in relation to the number of florets included in flower heads. Interesting differences in reproductive systems have been detected between subspecies ofLactuca viminea.

Key words

Asteraceae Lactuca Prenanthes Cicerbita Mycelis Reproductive system P/O index anthesis 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Allard, R. W., 1965: Genetic system associated with colonizing ability in predominantly self-pollinated species. — InBaker, H. G., Stebbins, G. L., (Eds): The genetics of colonizing species, pp. 50–76. — New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  2. Arroyo, J., 1988: Atributos florales y fenología de la floración en matorrales del sur de España. — Lagascalia15: 43–78.Google Scholar
  3. Baker, H. G., 1966: The evolution, functioning, and breakdown of heteromorphic incompatibility systems. I. ThePlumbaginaceae. — Evolution20: 349–368.Google Scholar
  4. , 1967: The evolution of weedy taxa in theEupatorium microstemon species aggregate. — Taxon16: 293–300.Google Scholar
  5. , 1974: The evolution of weeds. — Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst.5: 1–24.Google Scholar
  6. Brewer, J. G., 1968: Flowering and seedsetting in pyrethrum (Chrysanthemun cinerariaefolium Vis.). A review. — Pyrethrum Post9: 18–21.Google Scholar
  7. Crowe, L. K., 1954: Incompatibility inCosmos bipinnatus. — Heredity8: 1–11.Google Scholar
  8. Cruden, R. W., 1977: Pollen-ovule ratios: a conservative indicator of breeding systems in flowering plants. — Evolution31: 32–46.Google Scholar
  9. Devesa, J. A., Talavera, S., 1981: Revisión del géneroCarduus (Compositae) en la Península Ibérica e Islas Baleares. — Sevilla: Universidad de Sevilla.Google Scholar
  10. Drewlow, L. W., Ascher, L. W., Widmer, R. E., 1973: Genetic studies of self-incompatibility in the garden chrysanthemum,Chrysanthemum morifolium Ramat. — Theor. Appl. Genet.43: 1–5.Google Scholar
  11. Estes, J. R., Thorp, R. W., 1975: Pollination ecology ofPyrrhopappus carolinianus (Compositae). — Amer. J. Bot.62: 148–159.Google Scholar
  12. Feráková, V., 1977: The genusLactuca L. in Europe. — Univerzita Komenského.Google Scholar
  13. Gerstel, D. U., 1950: Self-incompatibility studies in guayule. II. Inheritance. — Genetics35: 482–506.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Gibbs, P. E., Milne, C., Vargas Carrillo, M., 1975: Correlation between the breeding system and recombination index in five species ofSenecio. — New Phytol.75: 619–626.Google Scholar
  15. Hughes, M. B., Babcock, E. B., 1950: Self-incompatibility inCrepis foetida L. subsp.rhoeadifolia (Bieb.)Schinz etKeller. — Genetics35: 570–588.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Imrie, B. C., Kirkman, C. J., Ross, D. R., 1972: Computer simulation of a sporophytic self-incompatibility breeding system. — Austral. J. Biol. Sci.25: 343–349.Google Scholar
  17. Jeffrey, C., 1975:Prenanthes L. andCicerbita Wallr. — InDavis, P. H., (Ed.): Flora of Turkey5, pp. 763–772. — Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Kevan, P. G., 1983: Floral colours through the insect eye: what they are and what they mean. — InJones, E. C., Little, R. J., (Eds): Handbook of experimental pollination biology, pp. 3–30. — New York: Scientific and Academic editions.Google Scholar
  19. Linqvist, K., 1960: Cytogenetic studies in theSerriola group ofLactuca. — Hereditas46: 75–151.Google Scholar
  20. Lloyd, D. G., 1965: Evolution of self-incompatibility and racial differentiation inLeavenworthia (Cruciferae). — Contr. Gray Herb.195: 3–134.Google Scholar
  21. , 1986: The avoidance of interference between the presentation of pollen and stigmas in angiosperms. I. Dichogamy. — New Zealand J. Bot.24: 135–162.Google Scholar
  22. Löve, A., Löve, D., 1975: Plant chromosomes. — Vaduz: Cramer.Google Scholar
  23. Mejías, J. A., 1992: Reproductive biology in the Iberian taxa of the generaSonchus andAetheorhiza (Asteraceae: Lactuceae). — Flora Mediterranea2: 5–24.Google Scholar
  24. , 1993a: Cytotaxonomic studies in the Iberian taxa of the genusLactuca (Compositae). — Bot. Helvet.103: 113–130.Google Scholar
  25. , 1993b: Mediterranean chromosome number reports 167–170. — Flora Mediterranea3: 333–338.Google Scholar
  26. Morin, N., 1983: Systematics ofGithopsis (Campanulaceae). — Syst. Bot.8: 436–468.Google Scholar
  27. Oka, H.-I., Morishima, H., 1967: Variations in the breeding systems of a wild rice,Oryza perennis. — Evolution21: 249–258.Google Scholar
  28. Olowokudejo, J. D., Heywood, V. H., 1984: Cytotaxonomy and breeding system of the genusBiscutella (Cruciferae). — Pl. Syst. Evol.145: 291–309.Google Scholar
  29. Ornduff, R., 1969: Reproductive biology in relation to systematics. — Taxon18: 121–133.Google Scholar
  30. Primack, R. B., 1983: Insect pollination in the New Zealand mountain flora. — New Zealand J. Bot.21: 317–333.Google Scholar
  31. , 1985: Longevity of individual flowers. — Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst.16: 15–37.Google Scholar
  32. Ronald, W. G., Ascher, P. D., 1975: Self-incompatibility in garden chrysanthemum: occurrence, inheritance, and breeding potential. — Theor. Appl. Genet.46: 45–54.Google Scholar
  33. Sano, Y., 1977: The pollination systems ofMelilotus species. — Oecol. Pl.12: 383–394.Google Scholar
  34. Sell, P. D., 1976:Prenanthes L. andCicerbita Wallr. — InTutin, T. G., Heywood, V. H., Burges, N. A., Moore, D. M., Valentine, D. H., Walters, S. M., Webb, D. A., (Eds): Flora Europaea4, pp. 331. — Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Solbrig, O. T., 1976: On the relative advantages of cross- and self-fertilization. — Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard.63: 262–276.Google Scholar
  36. Stebbins, G. L., 1953: A new classification of the tribeCichorieae, familyCompositae. — Madroño12: 65–81.Google Scholar
  37. , 1957: Self-fertilization and population variability in the higher plants. — Amer. Naturalist91: 337–354.Google Scholar
  38. , 1974: Flowering plants. Evolution above the species level. — Cambridge: Belknap Press.Google Scholar
  39. , 1953: Chromosomes and phylogeny in theCompositae: tribeCichorieae. — Univ. Calif. Publ. Bot.26: 401–430.Google Scholar
  40. Sutherland, S., 1986: Patterns of fruit-set. What controls fruit-flower ratios in plants. — Evolution40: 117–128.Google Scholar
  41. Thompson, R. C., Whitaker, T. W., Kosar, W. F., 1941: Interspecific genetic relationships inLactuca. — J. Agric. Res.63: 91–107.Google Scholar
  42. Vuille, F.-L., 1987: Reproductive biology of the genusDamasonium (Alismataceae). — Pl. Syst. Evol.157: 63–71.Google Scholar
  43. , 1988: The reproductive biology of the genusBaldellia. — Pl. Syst. Evol.159: 173–183.Google Scholar
  44. Vuilleumier, B. S., 1973: The genera ofLactuceae (Compositae) in the southeastern United States. — J. Arnold Arbor.54: 42–93.Google Scholar
  45. Weevers, T., 1952: Flower colours and their frequency. — Acta Bot. Neerl.1: 81–92.Google Scholar
  46. Wyatt, R., 1984: The evolution of self-pollination in granite outcrop species ofArenaria (Caryophyllaceae). I. Morphological correlates. — Evolution38: 804–816.Google Scholar
  47. , 1986: Ecology and evolution of self-pollination inArenaria uniflora (Caryophyllaceae). — J. Ecol.74: 403–418.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • José A. Mejías
    • 1
  1. 1.Departamento de Biologia Vegetal y EcologiaUniversidad de SevillaSevillaSpain

Personalised recommendations