Advertisement

Plant Systematics and Evolution

, Volume 216, Issue 1–2, pp 49–68 | Cite as

Investigation and documentation of hybridization betweenParkinsonia aculeata andCercidium praecox (Leguminosae:Caesalpinioideae)

  • Julie A. Hawkins
  • Laura White Olascoaga
  • Colin E. Hughes
  • José-Luis R. Contreras Jiménez
  • Pedro Mercado Ruaro
Article

Abstract

Morphometric, cytogenetic, geographical and ecological evidence for hybridization betweenParkinsonia aculeata andCercidium praecox is presented. Morphometric investigation using the character count procedure and cytogenetic observations confirm hybrid status. All diagnostic morphometric characters were intermediate in the hybrid. Both parents (2n = 28) show regular tetrad formation and pollen fertility greater than 94%. Hybrids have a chromosome number of 2n = 28 or 2n = 30, and display meiotic abnormalities including lagging chromosomes and micronucleus formation; less than 21% of hybrid pollen was fertile. Ecological and geographical information suggests that hybridization is occurring at increasing frequency due to the expanding range ofP. aculeata associated with cultivation as an ornamental, coupled with ecological disturbance and weediness, and the cultivation ofC. praecox and hybrids as fodder, ornamental and shade trees. Hybrid fertility and phenological observations, in conjunction with F-weighted principal component analysis, suggest that the progeny of F1 hybrids are established. The hybrid is formally described asP. ×carterae.

Key words

Leguminosae Parkinsonia aculeata Cercidium praecox Parkinsonia ×carterae Hybridization morphometric analysis cytology weeds 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Abbott, R. J., 1992: Plant invasions, interspecific hybridization and the evolution of new plant taxa. — Trends Ecol. Evol.7: 401–405.Google Scholar
  2. Adams, R. P., 1982: A comparison of multivariate methods for the detection of hybridization. — Taxon31: 646–661.Google Scholar
  3. Anderson, E., 1949: Introgressive hybridization. — New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  4. —, 1938: Hybridization inTradescantia. III. The evidence for introgressive hybridization. — Amer. J. Bot.25: 396–402.Google Scholar
  5. Anderson, L. E., 1954: Hoyer's solution as a rapid permanent mounting medium for bryophytes. — Bryologist57: 242–244.Google Scholar
  6. Atchison, E., 1951: Studies in theLeguminosae. VI: Chromosome numbers among tropical woody species. — Amer. J. Bot.38: 538–546.Google Scholar
  7. Bateman, R. M., Farrington, O. S., 1987: A morphometric study of ×Orchiaceras bergonii (Nanteuil)Camus and its parents (Aceras anthropophorum (L.)Aiton f. andOrchis simia Lamarck) in Kent. — Watsonia16: 397–407.Google Scholar
  8. Brenan, J. P. M., 1963: Notes on AfricanCaesalpinioideae: the genusPeltophoropsis Chiov. and its relationship. — Kew Bull.17: 203–209.Google Scholar
  9. —, 1980: A new species ofParkinsonia (Leguminosae) from Somalia. — Kew Bull.35: 563–565.Google Scholar
  10. Burkart, A., 1957: Las Leguminosas Argentinas. — Buenos Aires: Acme Agency.Google Scholar
  11. —, 1976: Notas en el generoCercidium (Caesalpinioideae) en Sud America. — Darwiniana20: 305–311.Google Scholar
  12. Carter, A. M., 1974a: The genusCercidium (Leguminosae:Caesalpinioideae) in the Sonoran Desert of Mexico. — Proc. Calif. Acad. of Sci.40: 17–57.Google Scholar
  13. —, 1974b: Evidence for the hybrid origin ofCercidium ×sonorae (Leguminosae:Caesalpinioideae) of northwestern Mexico. — Madroño22: 266–272.Google Scholar
  14. —, 1974: Pollen studies in relation to hybridization inCercidium andParkinsonia (Leguminosae:Caesalpinioideae). — Madroño22: 301–311.Google Scholar
  15. Conger, A. D., Fairchild, L. M., 1953: A quick-freeze method for making smear slides permanent. — Stain Technology28: 281–283.Google Scholar
  16. Dimmit, M. A., 1987: The hybrid Palo Verde “Desert Museum”: a new, superior tree for desert landscapes. — Desert Plants8: 99–103.Google Scholar
  17. Filer, D. L., 1993: Botanical research and herbarium management system, ver. 1. — Oxford, UK: Oxford Forestry Institute.Google Scholar
  18. García, A. V., 1988: Técnicas y procedimientos de citogenética vegetal. Chapingo, Mexico: Colegio de Posgraduados de Chapingo.Google Scholar
  19. Goldblatt, P., 1981: Index to plant chromosome numbers 1975–1978. — Monogr. Syst. Bot. Missouri Bot. Gard.5.Google Scholar
  20. - 1984: Index to plant chromosome numbers 1979–1981. — Monogr. Syst. Bot. Missouri Bot. Gard.8.Google Scholar
  21. - 1985: Index to plant chromosome numbers 1982–1983. — Monogr. Syst. Bot. Missouri Bot. Gard.13.Google Scholar
  22. - 1988: Index to plant chromosome numbers 1984–1985. — Monogr. Syst. Bot. Missouri Bot. Gard.23.Google Scholar
  23. -Johnson, D. E., 1990: Index to plant chromosome numbers 1986–1987. — Monogr. Syst. Bot. Missouri Bot. Gard.30.Google Scholar
  24. - - 1991: Index to plant chromosome numbers 1988–1989. — Monogr. Syst. Bot. Missouri Bot. Gard.40.Google Scholar
  25. - - 1994: Index to plant chromosome numbers 1990–1991. — Monogr. Syst. Bot. Missouri Bot. Gard.51.Google Scholar
  26. Gottlieb, L. D., 1972: Levels of confidence in the analysis of hybridization in plants. — Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard.59: 435–446.Google Scholar
  27. Gower, J. C., 1966: Some distance properties of latent root and vector methods used in multivariate analysis. — Biometrika53: 315–328.Google Scholar
  28. Hausery, E. J. P., Morrison, J. H., 1964: The cytochemical reduction of nitro blue tetrazolium as an index of pollen viability. — Amer. J. Bot.51: 748–752.Google Scholar
  29. Hawkins, J. A., 1996: Systematics ofParkinsonia L. andCercidium Tul. (Leguminoseae:Caesalpinioideae). — D. Phil. Thesis, University of Oxford, UK.Google Scholar
  30. Hickman, J. C., 1993: The Jepson Manual: higher plants of California. — Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  31. Hughes, C. E., 1989: Intensive study of multipurpose tree genetic resources. — Oxford Forestry Institute, UK: Unpubl. report.Google Scholar
  32. Humphries, C. J., 1983: Primary data in hybrid analysis. — InPlatnick, N. I., Funk, V. I., (Eds): Advances in cladistics: proceedings of the second meeting of the Willi Hennig Society, pp. 89–103. — New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Isely, D., 1975:Leguminosae of the United States: II. SubfamilyCaesalpinioideae, Parkinsonia. — Mem. New York Bot. Gard.25: 169–218.Google Scholar
  34. Jackson, R. C., 1971: The karyotype in systematics. — Annual Rev. Ecol. Syst.2: 327–365.Google Scholar
  35. Johnston, I. M., 1924: Taxonomic records concerning American spermatophytes. 1.Parkinsonia andCercidium. — Contrib. Gray Herb.70: 61–68.Google Scholar
  36. Jones, C. E., 1978: Pollinator constancy as a pre-pollination isolating mechanism between sympatric species ofCercidium. — Evolution32: 189–198.Google Scholar
  37. Legendre, P., Vaudor, A., 1991: The R Package: multidimensional analysis, spatial analysis. — Montreal.Google Scholar
  38. Marks, G. E., 1983: Evidence for the occurrence of dispensable and disadvantageous chromatin. — InBrandham, P. E., Bennett, M. D., (Eds): Kew Chromosome Conference II, pp. 269–272. — London: George Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
  39. MacBride, J. F., 1943: Flora of Peru. — Fieldiana13. — Chicago: Field Museum of Natural History.Google Scholar
  40. McDade, L. A., 1990: Hybrids and phylogenetic systematics. I. Patterns of character expression in hybrids and their implications for cladistic analysis. — Evolution44: 1685–1700.Google Scholar
  41. —, 1992: Hybrids and phylogenetic systematics. II. The impact of hybrids on cladistic analysis. — Evolution46: 1329–1346.Google Scholar
  42. —, 1995: Hybridization and phylogenetics. — InHoch, P. C., Stephenson, A. G., (Eds): Experimental and molecular approaches to plant biosystematics, pp. 305–331. — St. Louis: Missouri Botanical Garden.Google Scholar
  43. McVaugh, R., 1987: Flora Novo-Galiciana: a descriptive account of the vascular plants of western Mexico.5. — Ann Arbour: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  44. Miege, J., 1962: Quatrieme liste de nombres chromosomiques d'especes d'Afrique occidentale. — Rev. Cytol. Biol. Vég.24: 149–164.Google Scholar
  45. Minitab, 1991: Minitab Statistical Software, Release 8.2. — Pennsylvania: Minitab Inc.Google Scholar
  46. Nelson, G., 1983: Reticulation in cladograms. — InPlatnick, N. I., Funk, V. I., (Eds): Advances in cladistics: proceedings of the second meeting of the Willi Hennig Society, pp. 105–111. — New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  47. Polhill, R. M., Vidal, J. E., 1981:Caesalpineae. — InPolhill, R. M., Raven, P. H., (Eds): Advances in legume systematics,1, pp. 81–95. — Richmond: Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew.Google Scholar
  48. Raven, P. H., Kyhos, D. W., Hill, A. J., 1965: Chromosome numbers of spermatophytes, mostly Californian. — Aliso6: 105–113.Google Scholar
  49. Rieseberg, L. H., 1995: The role of hybridization in evolution: old wine in new skins. — Amer. J. Bot.82: 944–953.Google Scholar
  50. —, 1992: Molecular evidence and plant introgression. — InSoltis, P. S., Soltis, D. E., Doyle, J. J., (Eds): Molecular systematics, pp. 151–176. — New York: Chapman & Hall.Google Scholar
  51. —, 1993: What can molecular and morphological markers tell us about hybridization? — C. R. C. Crit. Rev. Pl. Sci.12: 213–241.Google Scholar
  52. —, 1995: Character expression, phylogenetic reconstruction and the detection of reticulate evolution. — InHoch, P. C., Stephenson, A. G., (Eds): Experimental and molecular approaches to plant biosystematics, pp. 333–353. — St. Louis: Missouri Botanical Garden.Google Scholar
  53. Perez-Arbelaez, E., 1956: Plantas utilisadas de Colombia. — Bogota: Rolda.Google Scholar
  54. Rosen, D. E., 1979: Fishes from the uplands and intermontane basins of Guatemala: revisionary studies and comparative biogeography. — Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist.162: 267–376.Google Scholar
  55. Rushton, B. S., 1993: Natural hybridization within the genusQuercus L. — Ann. Sci. Forest.50, Suppl. 1: 73s-90s.Google Scholar
  56. Sargent, C. S., 1889: Notes upon some North American trees V. — Gard. & Forest.2: 388.Google Scholar
  57. Sokal, R. R., Rohlf, F. J., 1981: Biometry. 2nd edn. — San Fransisco: Freeman.Google Scholar
  58. Somaroo, B. H., Grant, W. F., 1971: An interspecific diploid hybrid ofLotus (Leguminosae) with a B chromosome. — Canad. J. Genet. Cytol.13: 158–160.Google Scholar
  59. Stace, C. A., 1975: Hybridization and the flora of the British Isles. — London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  60. —, 1989: Plant taxonomy and biosystematics. — London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
  61. Stafleu, F. A., Cowan, R. S., 1983: Taxonomic Literature, 2nd edn.4. — Utrecht: Bohn, Scheltema & Holkema.Google Scholar
  62. Stebbins, G. L., 1945: Cytological analysis of species hybrids, 2. — Bot. Rev.11: 463–486.Google Scholar
  63. Stewart, J. L., Dunsdon, A. J., Hellin, J. J., Hughes, C. E., 1992: Wood biomass estimation of Central American dry zone trees. — Trop. Forest. Pap.26. — Oxford: Oxford Forestry Institute.Google Scholar
  64. Thiele, K., 1993: The holy grail of the perfect character: the cladistic treatment of morphometric data. — Cladistics9: 275–304.Google Scholar
  65. Turner, B. L., 1956: Chromosome numbers in theLeguminosae. I. — Amer. J. Bot.43: 577–581.Google Scholar
  66. —, 1960: Chromosome numbers in theLeguminosae. III. Species of the southwestern United States and Mexico. — Amer. J. Bot.47: 603–608.Google Scholar
  67. Wagner, W. H., 1969: The role and taxonomic treatment of hybrids. — Bioscience19: 785–789.Google Scholar
  68. —, 1983: Reticulistics: the recognition of hybrids and their role in cladistics and classification. — InPlatnick, N. I., Funk, V. I., (Eds): Advances in cladistics: proceedings of the second meeting of the Willi Hennig Society, pp. 63–79. — New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  69. Watson, S., 1876: Descriptions of new species of plants, chiefly Californian, with revisions of certain genera:Parkinsonia Torreyana. — Proc. Amer. Acad. Arts11: 135–136.Google Scholar
  70. Wells, H., 1980: A distance coefficient as a hybridization index: an example usingMimulus longifolius andM. flemingii (Scrophulariaceae) from Santa Cruz Island, California. — Taxon29: 53–65.Google Scholar
  71. Wilson, C. G., Miller, I. L., 1987:Parkinsonia aculeata in the Northern Territory. — Technical Bulletin106. — Australia: Department of Industries and Development.Google Scholar
  72. Wilson, P., 1992: On inferring hybridity from morphological intermediacy. — Taxon41: 11–23.Google Scholar
  73. Woods, W., 1992: Phytophagous insects collected fromParkinsonia aculeata (Leguminoseae:Caesalpiniaceae) in the Sonoran Desert region of the southwestern United States and Mexico. — Entomophaga373: 465–474.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • Julie A. Hawkins
    • 1
  • Laura White Olascoaga
    • 3
  • Colin E. Hughes
    • 1
  • José-Luis R. Contreras Jiménez
    • 2
  • Pedro Mercado Ruaro
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Plant SciencesUniversity of OxfordOxfordUK
  2. 2.Herbario de la Benemerita Universidad Autónomia de Puebla (HUAP)Puebla Pue.Mexico
  3. 3.Instituto de BiologíaUniversidad Nacional Autónoma de MéxicoDelegación CoyoacánMexico

Personalised recommendations