Skip to main content
Log in

Pollen-pistil interactions and interspecific-incompatibility among Panicum antidotale, P. coloratum, and P. deustum

  • Published:
Euphytica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

Because previous attempts to produce interspecific hybrids between different Panicum species were unsuccessful, we undertook this study to investigate the impediments to hybridization. Accessions of P. antidotale Retz. (blue panicgrass), P. coloratum L. (kleingrass), and P. deustum Thunb. were self-pollinated and also crossed with one another. Following pollination, pollen germination and tube growth were studied in vivo by observing the pollinated pistils with fluorescence microscopy. Examination of the self-pollinated pistils revealed that pollen germination was approximately 90% for each species and germination occurred shortly after pollination. Pollen tubes grew to the micropyle within one hour after pollination in kleingrass and two hours in blue panicgrass and P. deustum. One P. deustum accession (PI 364953) was self-incompatible with pollen tube inhibition occurring in the style. In the cross-pollinations, the pollen also germinated shortly after pollination, and the overall germination ranged from 77 to 88% for the different crosses. In crosses between kleingrass and P. deustum, most pollen tube growth was arrested shortly after penetration of the stigma papilla, but a limited number of tubes grew to different locations within the stigma. Only four reached the upper part of the style. In crosses between blue panicgrass and P. deustum, the pollen tubes failed to grow beyond the stigma except in one cross where they grew into the upper half of the style. In the blue panicgrass x kleingrass crosses, the tubes grew into the style but were arrested before entering the ovary. In the reciprocal cross the tubes grew into the ovary, but the tubes became disoriented and grew in an apparently random manner, never penetrating the micropyle. Thus, cross-incompatibility systems are responsible for the failure to produce hybrids among these Panicum species.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Hayman, D. L., 1956. The genetic control of incompatibility in Phalaris coerulescens. Aust. J. Biol. Sci. 9: 321–331.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heslop-Harrison, J., 1982. Pollen-stigma interaction and cross-incompatibility in the grasses. Science 215: 1358–1364.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kho, Y. O. & J. Baer, 1968. Observing pollen tubes by means of fluorescence. Euphytica 17: 298–302.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kho, Y. O. & J. Baer, 1970. A microscopial research on the incompatibility in the cross Rhododendron impeditum x R. williamsianum. Euphytica 19: 303–309.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lundqvist, A., 1956. Self-incompatibility in rye. I. Genetic control in the diploid. Hereditas 42: 293–348.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nettancourt, D.de, 1977. Incompatibility in Angiosperms. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

Incooperation with the Texas Agricultural Experiment Station. Texas A & M University.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Burson, B.L., Young, B.A. Pollen-pistil interactions and interspecific-incompatibility among Panicum antidotale, P. coloratum, and P. deustum . Euphytica 32, 397–405 (1983). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00021448

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00021448

Index words

Navigation