Advertisement

The Botanical Review

, Volume 7, Issue 10, pp 507–542 | Cite as

Apomixis in the angiosperms

  • G. L. Stebbins
Article

Keywords

Botanical Review Tapetal Cell Sexual Species Meiotic Abnormality Normal Meiosis 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literature Cited

  1. Afzelius, K. 1928. Die Embryobildung beiNigritella nigra. Svensk Bot. Tidskr.22: 82–91.Google Scholar
  2. —————. 1932. Zur Kenntnis der Fortpflanzungsverhältnisse und Chromosomenzahlen beiNigritella nigra. Svensk Bot. Tidskr.26: 365–369.Google Scholar
  3. —————. 1936. Apomixis in der GattungArnica. Svensk Bot. Tidskr.30: 572–579.Google Scholar
  4. Akerberg, E. 1936. Studien über die Samenbildung beiPoa pratensis L. Bot. Not. (Lund)1936: 213–280.Google Scholar
  5. —————. 1939. Apomictic and sexual seed formation inPoa pratensis. Hereditas25: 359–370.Google Scholar
  6. Andersson-Kottö, I. 1932. Observations on the inheritance of apospory and the alternation of generations. Svensk Bot. Tidskr.26: 99–106.Google Scholar
  7. —————. 1936. On the comparative development of alternating generations, with special reference to ferns. Svensk Bot. Tidskr.30: 57–78.Google Scholar
  8. ————— 1936. The inheritance of apospory inScolopendrium vulgare. Jour. Genet.32: 189–228.Google Scholar
  9. Archibald, E. E. A. 1939. The development of the ovule and seed of jointed cactus (Opuntia aurantiaca Lindley). South Afr. Jour. Sci.36: 195–211.Google Scholar
  10. Babcock, E. B., andCameron, D. R. 1934. Chromosomes and phylogeny inCrepis. II. The relationships of one hundred eight species. Univ. Calif. Publ. Agr. Sci.6: 287–324.Google Scholar
  11. -----,and Stebbins, G. L., Jr. 1937. The genusYoungia. Carnegie Inst. Wash. Publ. 484.Google Scholar
  12. -----,and -----. 1938. The American species ofCrepis: their relationships and distribution as affected by polyploidy and apomixis. Carnegie Inst. Wash. Publ. 504.Google Scholar
  13. Beasley, J. O. 1938. Nuclear size in relation to meiosis. Bot. Gaz.99: 865–871.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bergman, B. 1935a. Zytologische Studien über sexuelles und asexuellesHieracium umbellatum. Hereditas20: 47–64.Google Scholar
  15. —————. 1935b. Zytologische Studien über die Fortpflanzung bei den GattungenLeontodon undPicris. Svensk Bot. Tidskr.29: 155–301.Google Scholar
  16. —————. 1935c. Zur Kenntnis der Zytologie der SkandinavischenAntennaria-Arten. Hereditas20: 214–226.Google Scholar
  17. —————. 1937. Eine neue apomiktischeAntennaria. Svensk Bot. Tidskr.31: 391–393.Google Scholar
  18. Bower, F. O. 1935. Primitive land plants.Google Scholar
  19. Brown, W. L. 1939. Chromosome complements of five species ofPoa, with an analysis of variation inPoa pratensis. Am. Jour. Bot.26: 717–723.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Cappelletti, C. 1931. Sull’ azione dei prodotti del ricambio di miceli microrizogeni sulle piante ospiti. Ann. Bot. Roma19: 1–62.Google Scholar
  21. Chiarugi, A. 1926. Aposporia e apogamia inArtemisia nitida Bertol. Nuov. Giorn. Bot. Ital. n.s.33: 501–626.Google Scholar
  22. ————— 1930. Apomissia inOchna serrulata Walp. Nuov. Giorn. Bot. Ital. n.s.37: 1–250.Google Scholar
  23. Christoff, M. 1940. Über die Fortpflanzungsverhältnisse bei einigen Arten der Gattung Hieracium nach einer experimentell induzierten Chromosomenvermehrung. Planta, Arch. Wiss. Bot.31: 73–90.Google Scholar
  24. Christoff, M., andPopoff, A. 1933. Cytologische Studien über die GattungHieracium. Planta20: 440–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Clausen, J., Keck, D. D., and Hiesey, W. M. Experimental studies on the nature of species. I. The effect of varied environments on western North American plants. Carnegie Inst. Wash. Publ. 520.Google Scholar
  26. Crane, M. B. 1940. Reproductive versatility inRubus. I. Jour. Genet.40: 109–118.Google Scholar
  27. ————— 1939. Segregation in asexual (apomictic) offspring inRubus. Nature143: 684.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Curtis, W. M. 1940. The structure and development of some apomicts ofTaraxacum. Bull. Misc. Inf. Kew1940: 1–29.Google Scholar
  29. Darlington, C. D. 1932. Recent advances in cytology.Google Scholar
  30. -----. 1937. Recent advances in cytology.Google Scholar
  31. -----. 1940. Taxonomic species and genetic systems.In The new systematics: 137–160.Google Scholar
  32. Darrow, G. M., andWaldo, G. F. 1933. Pseudogamy in blackberry crosses. Jour. Hered.24: 313–315.Google Scholar
  33. Dermen, H. 1936. Aposporic parthenogenesis in a triploid apple,Malus hupehensis. Jour. Arn. Arb.17: 90–105.Google Scholar
  34. Dobzhansky, Th. 1937. Genetics and the origin of species.Google Scholar
  35. Du Rietz, G. E. 1930. The fundamental units of biological taxonomy. Svensk Bot. Tidskr.24: 333–426.Google Scholar
  36. Eames, A. J. 1936. Morphology of vascular plants, lower groups.Google Scholar
  37. Edman, G. 1929. Zur Entwicklungsgeschichte der GattungOxyria Hill, nebst zytologischen, embryologischen, und systematischen Bemerkungen über einige andere Polygonaceen. Acta Horti Bergiani9: 165–291.Google Scholar
  38. —————. 1931. Apomeiosis und Apomixis beiAthraphaxis frutescens C. Koch. Acta Horti Bergiana11: 13–66.Google Scholar
  39. Engelbert, V. 1940. Reproduction in somePoa species. Canad. Jour. Res. Ser. C18: 518–521.Google Scholar
  40. Erlandsson, S. 1939. The chromosome numbers of someTaraxacum species. Bot. Not. (Lund).1939: 261–264.Google Scholar
  41. Ernst, A. 1918. Bastardierung als Ursache der Apogamie im Pflanzenreich.Google Scholar
  42. Fagerlind, F. 1938. Bau und Entwicklung der floralen Organe vonHelosis Cayennensis. Svensk Bot. Tidskr.32: 139–159.Google Scholar
  43. —————. 1940a. Die Terminologie der Apomixis-Prozesse. Hereditas26: 1–22.Google Scholar
  44. —————. 1940b. Zytologie und Gametophytenbildung in der GattungWikstroemia. Hereditas26: 23–50.Google Scholar
  45. Fernald, M. L. 1931. Specific segregations and identities in some floras of eastern North America and the Old World. Rhodora33: 25–63.Google Scholar
  46. —————. 1933. Recent discoveries in the Newfoundland flora. Rhodora35: 369–386.Google Scholar
  47. Flovik, K. 1938. Cytological studies of arctic grasses. Hereditas24: 265–276.Google Scholar
  48. Focke, W. O. 1910–1914. Species Ruborum. Monographiae generis Rubi prodromus. Bibl. Bot.17(72): 1–223;19(83): 1–274.Google Scholar
  49. Frost, H. B. 1925. The chromosomes ofCitrus. Jour. Wash. Acad. Sci.15: 1–3.Google Scholar
  50. —————. 1926. Polyembryony, heterozygosis, and chimeras inCitrus. Hilgardia1: 365–402.Google Scholar
  51. —————. 1938a. Nucellar embryony and juvenile characters in clonal varieties ofCitrus. Jour. Hered.29: 423–432.Google Scholar
  52. -----. 1938b. The genetics ofCitrus. Cur. Sci., special number on “Genetics”: 24–27.Google Scholar
  53. Gelin, O. E. V. 1934. Embryologische und cytologische Studien in Heliantheae-Coreopsidinae. Acta Horti Bergiani11: 99–128.Google Scholar
  54. Gentscheff, G. 1937. Zytologische und Embryologische Studien über einigeHieracium-Arten. Planta27: 165–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. —————. 1938. Über die pseudogame Fortpflanzung beiPotentilla. Genetica20: 398–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. —————. 1940a. The balance system of meiosis inHieracium. Hereditas26: 209–249.Google Scholar
  57. —————. 1940b. Parthenogenesis and pseudogamy inPotentilla. Bot. Not. (Lund)1940: 109–132.Google Scholar
  58. Goebel, K. 1931. Blütenbildung und Sprossgestaltung. Organographie der Pflanzen, Suppl. 2.Google Scholar
  59. —————. 1932. Organographie der Pflanzen3(1): 1405–1408.Google Scholar
  60. Gregory, W. C. 1940. Experimental studies on the cultivation of excised anthers in nutrient solution. Am. Jour. Bot.27: 687–692.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Gustafson, Alton H. 1933. Cytological studies in the genusHieracium, Bot. Gaz.94: 512–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Gustafsson, Äke. 1930. Castrierung und Pseudogamie in der GattungRubus. Bot. Not. (Lund)1930: 477–494.Google Scholar
  63. —————. 1931a. Sind diecanina-Rosen apomiktisch? Bot. Not. (Lund)1931: 21–30.Google Scholar
  64. —————. 1931b. Weitere Kastrierungsversuche in der GattungRosa. Bot. Not. (Lund)1931: 350–354.Google Scholar
  65. —————. 1932. Zytologische und Experimentelle Studien in der GattungTaraxacum. Hereditas16: 41–62.Google Scholar
  66. —————. 1934a. Die Entwicklungswege der parthenogenetischen E. M. Z. Bot. Not. (Lund)1934: 333–338.Google Scholar
  67. —————. 1934b. Die Formenbildung der total Apomikten. Hereditas19: 259–283.Google Scholar
  68. —————. 1935a. Studies on the mechanism of parthenogenesis. Hereditas21: 1–112.Google Scholar
  69. —————. 1935b. The importance of apomicts for plant geography. Bot. Not. (Lund)1935: 325–330.Google Scholar
  70. —————. 1937. The occurrence of a sexual population within the apomicticTaraxacum vulgare group. Bot. Not. (Lund)1937: 332–336.Google Scholar
  71. —————. 1938a. The cytological differentiation of male and female organs in parthenogenetic species. Biol. Zentralbl.58: 608–616.Google Scholar
  72. —————. 1938b. A general theory for the interrelation of meiosis and mitosis. Hereditas25: 31–32.Google Scholar
  73. —————. 1939a. Differential polyploidy within the blackberries. Hereditas25: 33–47.Google Scholar
  74. —————. 1939b. The interrelation of meiosis and mitosis. I. The mechanism of agamospermy. Hereditas25: 289–322.Google Scholar
  75. Haberlandt, G.. 1923a. Zur Embryologie vonAllium odorum. Ber. Deut. Bot. Ges.41: 174–179.Google Scholar
  76. —————. 1923b. Über die Ursache des Ausbleibens der Reduktionsteilung in den Samenanlagen einiger parthenogenetischen Angiospermen. Sitzb. K. Preuss. Akad. Wiss.1923: 283–294.Google Scholar
  77. Hodgson, R. W., andCameron, S. H. 1938. Effects of reproduction by nucellar embryony on clonal characteristics ofCitrus. Jour. Hered.29: 417–419.Google Scholar
  78. Hollingshead, L., andBabcock, E. B. 1930. Chromosomes and phylogeny inCrepis. Univ. Calif. Publ. Agr. Sci.6: 1–53.Google Scholar
  79. Holmgren, I. 1919. Zytologische Studien über die Fortpflanzung bei den Gattungen Erigeron und Eupatorium. K. Svensk. Vet. Akad. Handl.59(7): 1–118.Google Scholar
  80. Horn, C. L. 1940. Existence of only one variety of cultivated mangosteen explalined by asexually formed “seed”. Science92: 237–238.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Jeffrey, E. C., andHaertl, E. J. 1939a. The production of unfertilized seeds inTrillium. Science90: 81–82.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. —————. 1939b. Apomixis inTrillium. La Cellule48: 77–88.Google Scholar
  83. Johnson, A. M. 1936. Polyembryony inEugenia Hookeri. Am. Jour. Bot.23: 83–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Juliano, J. B. 1934. Origin of embryos in the strawberry mango. Philip. Jour. Sci.54: 553–556.Google Scholar
  85. —————. 1937. Embryos of Carabao Mango,Mangifera indica L. Philip. Agr.25: 749–760.Google Scholar
  86. ————— 1932. Floral morphology of the mango (Mangifera indica L.) with special reference to the pico variety from the Philippines. Philip. Agr.21: 449–472.Google Scholar
  87. Kiellander, C. L. 1935. Apomixis beiPoa serotina. Bot. Not. (Lund)1935: 87–95.Google Scholar
  88. —————. 1937. On the embryological basis of apomixis inPoa palustris L. Svensk Bot. Tidskr.31: 425–429.Google Scholar
  89. Koroleva, V. A. 1939. Interspecific hybridization in the genusTaraxacum. Compt. Rend. (Doklady) Acad. Sci. URSS24: 174–176.Google Scholar
  90. Kostoff, D., andTiber, E. 1939. A tetraploid rubber plant,Taraxacum kok-saghyz, obtained by colchicine treatment. Compt. Rend. Acad. Sci. URSS22: 119–120.Google Scholar
  91. Kuhn, E. 1928. Zur Zytologie vonThalictrum. Jahrb. Wiss. Bot.68: 382–430.Google Scholar
  92. Levan, A. 1940. The cytology ofAllium amplectens and the occurrence in nature of its asynapsis. Hereditas26: 353–394.Google Scholar
  93. Lidforss, B. 1914. Résumé seiner Arbeiten inRubus. Zeits. Ind. Abst. Vererb.12: 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Liljefors, A. 1934. Über normale und apospore Embryoentwicklung in der GattungSorbus, nebst einigen Bemerkungen über die Chromosomenzahlen. Svensk Bot. Tidskr.28: 290–299.Google Scholar
  95. Marklund, G. 1938. DieTaraxacum-flora Estlands. Act. Bot. Fenn.23: 1–150.Google Scholar
  96. Marsden-Jones, E. M., andTurrill, W. B. 1935. Studies in Ranunculus. III. Further experiments concerning sex inRanunculus acris. Jour. Genet.31: 363–378.Google Scholar
  97. McDonald, C. C. 1927. A study of seed development in three species ofErigeron, with special reference to apogamy. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club54: 479–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Metcalfe, C. R. 1939. The sexual reproduction ofRanunculus Ficaria. Ann. Bot.3: 91–103.Google Scholar
  99. Modilewski, J. 1930. Neue Beitrage zur Polyembryonie vonAllium odorum. Ber. Deut. Bot. Ges.48: 285–294.Google Scholar
  100. Muntzing, A. 1928. Pseudogamie in der GattungPotentilla. Hereditas11: 267–283.Google Scholar
  101. —————. 1931. Note on the cytology of some apomicticPotentilla species. Hereditas15: 166–178.Google Scholar
  102. —————. 1933. Apomictic and sexual seed formation inPoa. Hereditas17: 131–154.Google Scholar
  103. —————. 1940. Further studies on apomixis and sexuality inPoa. Hereditas26: 115–190.Google Scholar
  104. ————— 1931. Field studies and experimental methods in taxonomy. Hereditas15: 1–12.Google Scholar
  105. Noack, K. L. 1939. ÜberHypericum-Kreuzungen VI. Fortpflänzungsverhältnisse und Bastarde vonHypericum perforatum L. Zeit. Ind. Abst. Vererb.76: 569–601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Oehler, E. 1927. Entwicklungsgeschichtlich-zytologische Untersuchungen an einigen saprophytischen Gentianaceen. Planta3: 641–733.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. Oehlkers, F. 1937. Neue Versuche über zytologisch-genetische Probleme (Physiologie der Meiosis). Biol. Zentralbl.57: 126–149.Google Scholar
  108. Oka, H. T. 1935. Zytologische Beobachtungen über eine Mutant-sippe vonErigeron annuus. Jap. Jour. Genet.10: 237–241. [Japanese, German summary.]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Okabe, S. 1930. Über Parthenogenesis beiHouttuynia cordata. Jap. Jour. Genet.6: 14–19. [Japanese, German summary.]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. —————. 1932. Parthenogenesis beiIxeris dentata. Bot. Mag. Tokyo46: 518–523. [Japanese, German summary.]Google Scholar
  111. Ostenfeld, C. H. 1910. Further studies on the apogamy and hybridization of theHieracia. Zeits. Ind. Abst. Vererb.3: 241–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. —————. 1921. Some experiments on the origin of new forms in the genusHieracium, subgenusArchieracium. Jour. Genet.11: 117–122.Google Scholar
  113. Pace, L. M. 1913. Apogamy inAtamosco. Bot. Gaz.56: 376–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. Petrov, D. F. 1939. On the occurrence of facultative pseudogamy in a triploid variety of raspberries, Immer Tragende (R. idaeus). Compt. Rend. Acad. Sci. URSS22. 352–353.Google Scholar
  115. Pijl, L. V. D. 1934. Über Polyembryonie beiEugenia. Rec. Trav. Bot. Néerl.31: 113–187.Google Scholar
  116. Poddubnaja-Arnoldi, V. A. 1933. Geschlechtliche und ungeschlechtliche Fortpflanzung bei einigenChondrilla-Arten. Planta19: 46–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. —————. 1939. Development of pollen and embryosac in interspecific hybrids ofTaraxacum. Compt. Rend. Acad. Sci. URSS24: 374–377.Google Scholar
  118. ————— 1934. Eine zyto-embryologische Untersuchung einiger Arten der GattungTaraxacum. Planta23: 19–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. —————. 1937. Character of propagation in some species of the genusTaraxacum. Bot. Zhurn. (USSR)22: 267–295. [Russian, brief English summary.]Google Scholar
  120. Popoff, A. 1935. Über die Fortpflanzungsverhältnisse der GattungPotentilla. Planta24: 510–522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  121. Redinger, K. 1938. Über die Entstehung diploider Embryonen aus unbefruchteten, mit gattungsfremden Pollen bestaübten Samenanlagen beiPetunia nyctaginiflora. Biol. Zentralbl.58: 142–151.Google Scholar
  122. Rosenberg, O. 1917. Die Reduktionsteilung und ihre Degeneration inHieracium. Svensk Bot. Tidskr.11: 145–206.Google Scholar
  123. —————. 1927. Die semiheterotypische Teilung und ihre Bedeutung für die Entstehung verdoppelter Chromosomenzahlen. Hereditas8: 305–338.Google Scholar
  124. -----. 1930. Apogamie und Parthenogenesis bei Pflanzen. Handb. Vererb. II.Google Scholar
  125. Sato, D. 1938. Karyotype alteration and phylogeny. IV. Karyotypes in Amaryllidaceae with special reference to the SAT chromosome. Cytologia9: 203–242.Google Scholar
  126. Sax, H. J., andSax, K. 1935. Chromosome structure and behavior in mitosis and meiosis. Jour. Arn. Arb.16: 423–439.Google Scholar
  127. Schnarf, K. 1929. Embryologie der Angiospermen. Handb. Pflanzenanat.10(2) pts. 1–5.Google Scholar
  128. Sharp, L. J. 1934. Introduction to cytology.Google Scholar
  129. Sprecher, M. A. 1919. Étude sur la sémence et la germination duGarcinia mangostana L. Rev. Gen. Bot.31: 513–531; 611–634.Google Scholar
  130. Stebbins, G. L., Jr. 1932a. Cytology ofAntennaria I. Normal species. Bot. Gaz.94: 134–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  131. —————. 1932b. Cytology ofAntennaria II. Parthenogenetic species. Bot. Gaz.94: 322–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  132. —————. 1935. A new species ofAntennaria from the Appalachian region. Rhodora37: 229–237.Google Scholar
  133. ————— 1939. The effect of polyploidy and apomixis on the evolution of species inCrepis. Jour. Hered.30: 519–530.Google Scholar
  134. ————— 1939. Aposporic development in the North American species ofCrepis. Genetica21: 1–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  135. Steil, W. N. 1939. Apogamy, apospory, and parthenogenesis in the pteridophytes. Bot. Rev.5: 433–453.Google Scholar
  136. Stenar, H. 1935. Parthenogenesis in der GattungCalamagrostis. Ark. Bot.25: 1–8.Google Scholar
  137. Suessenguth, K. 1923. Über die Pseudogamie beiZygopetalum Mackayi Hook. Ber. Deut. Bot. Ges.41: 16–23.Google Scholar
  138. Sukatschew, W. 1928. Einige experimentelle Untersuchungen über den Kampf ums Dasein zwischen Biotypen derselben Art. Zeits. Ind. Abst. Vererb.47: 54–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  139. Swingle, W. T. 1932. Recapitulation of seedling characters by nucellar buds developing in the embryo-sac ofCitrus. Proc. 6th Int. Cong. Genet.2: 196–197.Google Scholar
  140. Tackholm, G. 1922. Zytologische Studien über die GattungRosa. Acta Horti. Bergiani7: 97–381.Google Scholar
  141. Thomas, P. T. 1940. Reproductive versatility inRubus. II. The chromosomes and development. Jour. Genet.40: 119–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  142. Tinney, F. W. 1940. Cytology of parthenogenesis inPoa pratensis. Jour. Agr. Res.60: 351–360.Google Scholar
  143. -----, and Aamodt, G. S. The progeny test as a measure of the types of seed development inPoa pratensis L. Jour. Hered.31: 457–464.Google Scholar
  144. Turesson, G. 1926. Studien überFestuca ovina I. Normalgeschlechtliche, halb- und ganzvivipäre Typen nordischer Herkunft. Hereditas8: 161–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  145. —————. 1930. Studien überFestuca ovina II. Chromosomenzahl und Viviparie. Hereditas13: 177–184.Google Scholar
  146. —————. 1931. Studien überFestuca ovina III. Weitere Beiträge zur Kenntnis der Chromosomenzahlen vivipären Formen. Hereditas15: 13–16.Google Scholar
  147. Turrill, W. B. 1938a. Problems of BritishTaraxaca. Proc. Linn. Soc. Lond.150: 120–124.Google Scholar
  148. —————. 1938b. Material for a study of taxonomic problems inTaraxacum. Rep. Bot. Soc. Exch. Club11 (1937): 570–589.Google Scholar
  149. Vaaramo, A. 1939. Cytological studies on some Finnish species and hybrids of the genusRubus L. Maataloustiet Aikak. (Agr. Mag. Helsingfors)11: 72–85.Google Scholar
  150. Webber, H. J. 1931. The economic importance of apogamy inCitrus andMangifera. Proc. Am. Soc. Hort. Sci.28: 57–61.Google Scholar
  151. —————. 1932. Variations inCitrus seedlings and their relation to rootstock selection. Hilgardia7: 1–79.Google Scholar
  152. Webber, J. M. 1940. Polyembryony. Bot. Rev.6: 575–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  153. Weber, E. 1929. Entwicklungsgeschichtliche Untersuchungen über die GattungAllium. Bot. Arch.25: 1–44.Google Scholar
  154. Wettstein, F. v. 1928. Morphologie und Physiologie des Formwechsels der Moose auf genetischer Grundlage II. Bibl. Genet.10: 1–216.Google Scholar
  155. Wiger, J. 1930. Ein neue Fall von autonomer Nucellarpolyembryonie. Bot. Not. (Lund)1930: 368–370.Google Scholar
  156. Winkler, H. 1908. Über Parthenogenesis und Apogamie im Pflanzenreich. Prog. Rei. Bot.2: 293–454.Google Scholar
  157. -----. 1920. Verbreitung und Ursache der Parthenogenesis im Pflanzen- und Tierreiche.Google Scholar
  158. —————. 1934. Fortpflanzung der Gewächse 7. Apomixis. Handw. Naturwiss.4: 451–461.Google Scholar
  159. Woodworth, R. H. 1930. Cytological studies in the Betulaceae. III. Parthenogenesis and polyembryony inAlnus rugosa. Bot. Gaz.89: 402–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  160. Zürn, K. 1939. Untersuchungen zur Physiologie der Meiosis. X. Neue Beiträge zur Kenntnis des Einflusses der Plastiden auf den Ablauf der Meiosis. Zeits. Bot.34: 273–310.Google Scholar
  161. Zweifel, R. 1939. Cytologisch-embryologische Untersuchungen anBalanophora abbreviata Blume undBalanophora indica Wall. Vierteljahresschr. Naturf. Ges. Zürich84: 245–306.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The New York Botanical Garden 1941

Authors and Affiliations

  • G. L. Stebbins
    • 1
  1. 1.University of CaliforniaUSA

Personalised recommendations