Folia Geobotanica

, Volume 39, Issue 2, pp 161–171 | Cite as

Cytotype distribution inEmpetrum (Ericaceae) at various spatial scales in the Czech Republic

  • Jan Suda
  • Radka Malcová
  • Daniel Abazid
  • Marek Banaš
  • František Procházka
  • Ota Šída
  • Milan Štech
Article

Abstract

Ploidy levels inEmpetrum (crowberry) from the Czech Republic and from one adjacent locality in Poland were estimated by flow cytometry to examine cytotype distribution patterns at large (within the country), medium (within mountain ranges) and small (within particular localities) spatial scales. Diploid, triploid, and tetraploid individuals were found. Triploids are reported from Central Europe for the first time; they occurred in the Krkonoše Mts. Exclusively diploid plants were observed in three mountain ranges (the Krušné hory Mts., Labské pískovce Mts., Adršpašsko-Teplické skály Mts.), exclusively tetraploids were observed in the Jeseníky Mts., and both cytotypes were observed in the Šumava Mts., Jizerské hory Mts. and Krkonoše Mts. Except for the latter mountain range, diploids and tetraploids were always found in different habitats. Spatial isolation is supposed to be the main barrier preventing cytotype mating. A mosaic-like sympatric occurrence of different cytotypes was demonstrated in the Krkonoše Mts., where peat bogs and rocky places were not spatially separated. Eight of 11 localities studied there were inhabited by diploids and tetraploids (five localities), diploids and triploids (one locality) or all three ploidy levels (two localities). Diploid and triploid plants occasionally intermingled at 0.3 × 0.3 m. Flower sex in crowberries was strongly associated with ploidy level: diploids usually had unisexual flowers, the tetraploids bore exclusively bisexual flowers. However, a few diploid plants with hermaphrodite flowers occurred in one population in the Krkonoše Mts.

Keywords

Flow cytometry Ploidy level Spatial variation Sympatry Triploid 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bell J.N. &Tallis J.H. (1973): Biological flora of the British Isles.Empetrum nigrum L.J. Ecol. 61: 289–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Blackburn K.B. (1938): On the occurrence of a hermaphrodite plant ofEmpetrum nigrum L.J. Bot. 76: 306–307.Google Scholar
  3. Boratyński A. (1986): Chronione i godne ochrony drzewa i krzewy polskiej części Sudetów, Pogórza i Przedgórza Sudeckiego. 2.Empetrum nigrum L. s.l. (Protected or deserving protection trees and shrubs from the Polish part of Sudety Mts., Pogórze and Przedgórze Sudeckie region. 2.Empetrum nigrum L. s.l.).Arbor. Kórnickie 31: 21–37.Google Scholar
  4. Boratyński A. &Vera de la Puente M.L. (1995): TheEmpetraceae on the Iberian Peninsula.Willdenowia 25: 39–53.Google Scholar
  5. Costich D.E., Ortiz R., Meagher T.R., Bruederle L.P. &Vorsa N. (1993): Determination of ploidy level and nuclear DNA content in blueberry by flow cytometry.Theor. Appl. Genet. 86: 1001–1006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Čvančara A. (1990):Empetraceae Lindl. In:Hejný S. &Slavík B. (eds.),Květena ČR 2 (Flora of the Czech Republic 2), Academia, Praha, pp. 519–521.Google Scholar
  7. Danielsson B. (1988): Nordkråkbär,Empetrum hermaphroditum, i nordöstra Småland (Empetrum hermaphroditum in NE Småland, S Sweden).Svensk Bot. Tidskr. 82: 118–124.Google Scholar
  8. Favarger C., Richard J.-L. &Duckert M.M. (1959): La Camarine noireEmpetrum nigrum etEmpetrum hermaphroditum en Suisse.Ber. Schweiz. Bot. Ges. 69: 249–260.Google Scholar
  9. Good R.D.O. (1927): The genusEmpetrum L.J. Linn. Soc., Bot. 47: 489–523.Google Scholar
  10. Hagerup O. (1927):Empetrum hermaphroditum (Lge.)Hagerup. A new tetraploid, bisexual species.Dansk Bot. Ark. 5: 1–17.Google Scholar
  11. Hultén E. &Fries M. (1986):Atlas of the North European vascular plants north of the Tropic of Cancer I–III. Koeltz Scientific Books, Königstein.Google Scholar
  12. Löve D. (1960): The red-fruited crowberries in North America.Rhodora 62: 265–292.Google Scholar
  13. Lysák M.A. &Doležel J. (1998): Estimation of nuclear DNA content inSesleria (Poaceae).Caryologia 51: 123–132.Google Scholar
  14. Marklund G. (1939): Beobachtungen überEmpetrum hermaphroditum (Lange)Hagerup undE. nigrum L. s.str.Mem. Soc. Fauna Fl. Fenn. 15: 74–77.Google Scholar
  15. Meusel H., Jäger E., Rauschert S. &Weinert E. (1978):Vergleichende chorologie der zentraleuropäischen Flora II. VEB Gustav Fischer Verlag, Jena.Google Scholar
  16. Slavík B. (1990):Fytokartografické syntézy ČR 2 (Phytocartographical syntheses of the Czech Republic 2). Botanický ústav ČSAV, Průhonice.Google Scholar
  17. Suda J. (2002): New DNA polidy level inEmpetrum (Empetraceae) revealed by flow cytometry.Ann. Bot. Fenn. 39: 133–141.Google Scholar
  18. Suda J. &Lysák M.A. (2001): A taxonomic study of theVaccinium sect.Oxycoccus (Hill)W.D.J. Koch (Ericaceae) in the Czech Republic and adjacent territories.Folia Geobot. 36: 303–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Teppner H. (1987):Empetrum nigrum L. s.str. — neu für die Alpen.Bot. Jahrb. Syst. 108: 355–362.Google Scholar
  20. Velluti C., Krähenbühl M. &Ferrari C. (1995): Contributo alla citogeografia diEmpetrum nigrum L. e diE. hermaphroditum (Lange)Hagerup (Empetraceae) (A contribution to the cytogeography ofEmpetrum nigrum L. andE. hermaphroditum (Lange)Hagerup (Empetraceae)).Arch. Geobot. 1: 165–170.Google Scholar
  21. Vorsa N. &Ballington J.R. (1991): Fertility of triploid highbush blueberry.J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 116: 336–341.Google Scholar
  22. Warner B.G. &Chinnappa C.C. (1990): Pollen polymorphism inEmpetrum nigrum (Empetraceae) in Finland.Ann. Bot. Fenn. 27: 231–234.Google Scholar
  23. Webb D.A. (1972):Empetrum L. In:Tutin T.G. et al. (eds.),Flora Europeae 3, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p. 14.Google Scholar
  24. Willdenow C.L. (1805):Caroli Linnaei Species Plantarum 4. G.C. Nauk, Berolini.Google Scholar
  25. Zarzycki K. &Guzik J. (1975): The crowberry —Empetrum nigrum L. andE. hermaphroditum (Lange)Hagerup in Poland.Fragm. Florist. Geobot. 21: 423–431.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Institute of Botany, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jan Suda
    • 1
    • 2
  • Radka Malcová
    • 2
  • Daniel Abazid
    • 3
  • Marek Banaš
    • 4
  • František Procházka
    • 5
  • Ota Šída
    • 6
  • Milan Štech
    • 7
  1. 1.Department of BotanyCharles UniversityPragueCzech Republic
  2. 2.Institute of BotanyAcademy of Sciences of the Czech RepublicPrůhonice 1Czech Republic
  3. 3.Blata Regional MuseumSoběslavCzech Republic
  4. 4.Department of Ecology and Environmental SciencesPalacký UniversityOlomoucCzech Republic
  5. 5.Eko-Agency KOPRVimperkCzech Republic
  6. 6.Department of BotanyNational MuseumCzech Republic
  7. 7.Department of BotanyUniversity of South BohemiaČeské BudějoviceCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations