Interspecific cross-incompatibility system in the genusAvena

  • Ichizo Nishiyama


A major mechanism of abortive interspecific crosses inAvena appears to be well explained by a hypothesis of polar-nuclei activation (Nishiyama and Yabuno, 1978, 1979). Under the hypothesis, activating value (AV) or response value (RV) of the six following species was estimated, 0.45 being assigned toA. clauda (2x), 0.8 toA. canariensis (2x) andA. prostrata (2x), 0.95 toA. damacena (2x), 1.4 toA. murphyi (4x) and 2.7 toA. byzantina (6x). AV and RV represent the intensity of the mutual reaction between the male and female gametes, respectively, in fertilization. Next the degree of activation of the two polar nuclei by one male nucleus which produce the first endosperm nucleus was shown by the activation index (AI) computed as AV/2RV×100(%). The AI showed a wide range of 7% to 338% in 37 interspecific crosses, the six species being crossed with each other or with some tester species. The pattern of relationship between the crossability, including plumpness, germination and others of hybrid seeds, and the AI% was found to completely agree with that expected from the standard cross-compatibility system inAvena (Fig. 1A, B). That is, compatible crosses occurred within a range of about 20% to 80% AI but incompatible crosses occurred beyond these limits.

Key words

Activating value Activation index Avena Cross-incompatibility Interspecific cross Response value 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Austin, C.R. 1965. Fertilization. C.L. Markert, ed., Foundation of Developmental Biology Series p. 1–145. Prentice-Hall, New Jersey.Google Scholar
  2. Cooper, D.C. andR.A. Brink. 1940. Somatoplastic sterility as a cause of seed failure after interspecific hybridization. Genetics25: 593–617.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Guignard, L. 1899. Sur les anthérozoides et la double copulation chez les végétaux angiospermes. Compt. Rend. Acad. Sci., Paris128: 864–871.Google Scholar
  4. Johnston, S.A., T.P.M. den Nijis, S.J. Peloquin andR.E. Hanneman, Jr. 1980. The significance of genic balance to endosperm development in interspecific crosses. Theor. Appl. Genet.57: 5–9.Google Scholar
  5. — andR.E. Hanneman, Jr. 1980. Support of the endosperm balance number hypothesis utilizing tuber-bearingSolanum species. Amer. Potato J.57: 7–14.Google Scholar
  6. Kihara, H. andI. Nishiyama. 1932. Different compatibility in reciprocal crosses ofAvena, with special reference to tetraploid hybrids between hexaploid and diploid species. Jap. J. Bot.6: 245–305.Google Scholar
  7. Müntzing, A. 1933. Hybrid incompatibility and origin of polyploidy. Hereditas18: 33–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Navashin, S. 1898. Resultate einer Revision der Befruchtungsvorgänge beiLilium martagon undFritillaria tenella. Bull. Acad. St. Petersburg9, No. 4.Google Scholar
  9. Nishiyama, I. 1935. Experimentelle embryologische Studien an tetraploidenAvena-Bastarden (2x×6x). Bull. Sericulture and Silk-Industry8: 378–382 (Japanisch mit deutschen Zusammenfassung).Google Scholar
  10. —. 1952. Polyploid-studies in the Brassiceae, I. The seed development in reciprocal crosses between diploid and tetraploidRaphanus. Memoirs Res. Inst. Food Sci. Kyoto Univ.3: 1–7.Google Scholar
  11. — 1970. Four types of flowering time inAvena. Jap. J. Genet.45: 399–409.Google Scholar
  12. — 1979a. Suggestive information on an interspecific cross-incompatibility system inTriticum. Wheat Information Service49: 32–34.Google Scholar
  13. — 1979b. An interspecific cross-incompatibility system in diploid and tetraploidAegilops. Wheat Information Service50: 61–64.Google Scholar
  14. — 1981.Triticum-Aegilops cross-incompatibility system based on the polar-nuclei activation hypothesis. Boletim Soci. Broteriana53: 813–822.Google Scholar
  15. Nishiyama, I. 1984. Polar-nuclei activation hypothesis on the abortive interspecific hybridization. Intern. Symp. New Genet. Appro. Crop Improv. Karachi, 1982, in press.Google Scholar
  16. —, andM. Iizuka. 1952. Successful hybridization by means of X-rayed pollen in otherwise incompatible crosses. Bull. Inst. Food Sci. Kyoto Univ.8: 81–89 (Japanese with English summary).Google Scholar
  17. — andY. Inamori. 1953. Polyploidy studies in the Brassicese, III. Hybridization between diploid species (2n=20) and their autotetraploids. Memoirs Res. Inst. Food Sci. Kyoto Univ.5: 1–13.Google Scholar
  18. — andN. Inomata. 1966. Embryological studies on cross-incompatibility between 2x and 4x inBrassica. Jap. J. Genet.41: 27–42.Google Scholar
  19. — andH. Karasawa. 1954. Somatoplastic sterility in reciprocal crosses between 2x- and 4x-plants inCapsicum. Jap. J. Breeding3: 36–40 (Japanese with English summary).Google Scholar
  20. —,M. Shimotsuma andT. Yabuno. 1952. A comparative study on the development of polyploid seeds in watermelon. Seiken Zihô5: 110–118 (Japanese with English summary).Google Scholar
  21. — andS. Uematsu. 1967. Radiobiological studies in plants, XIII. Embryogenesis following X-irradiation of pollen inLycopersicum pimpinellifolium. Radiation Bot.7: 481–489.Google Scholar
  22. — andT. Yabuno. 1978. Causal relationships between the polar nuclei in double fertilization and interspecific cross-incompatibility inAvena. Cytologia43: 453–466.Google Scholar
  23. ——. 1979. Triple fusion of the primary endosperm nucleus as a cause of interspecific cross-incompatibility inAvena. Euphytica28: 57–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. ——. 1983. A mechanism of the alteration of crossability in artificialAvena polyploids. Jap. J. Genet.58: 51–57.Google Scholar
  25. Ohtsuka, I. 1980. D genome chromosome on the compatible relation between wheat genomes andAigilops squarrosa cytoplasm. Seiken Zihô29: 18–39 (Japanese with English summary).Google Scholar
  26. Pienaar, R. De V. 1973. Methods to improve the gene flow from rye and wheat toTriticale. E. R. Sears and L.M.S. Sears, ed., Proc. 4th Intern. Wheat Genet. Symp. p. 253–258.Google Scholar
  27. Thomas, H. 1970. Chromosome relationship between the cultivated oat,Avena sativa (6x) andA. ventricosa (2x). Can. J. Genet. Cytol.12: 36–43.Google Scholar
  28. Sachet, M.H. 1948. Fertilization in six incompatible species crosses ofDatura. Amer. J. Bot.35: 302–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Valentine, D.H. andR.S.J. Woodell. 1963. Studies in British Primulas, X. Seed incompatibility in intraspecific and interspecific crosses at diploid and tetraploid levels. New Phytol.62: 125–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Watkins, A.E. 1932. Hybrid sterility and incompatibility. J. Genet.25: 125–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Wilson, D.B. 1925. The Cell in Development and Heredity. 3 ed. Macmillan Co., New York.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Botanical Society of Japan 1984

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ichizo Nishiyama
    • 1
  1. 1.Kyoto UniversityKyoto

Personalised recommendations