Plant Systematics and Evolution

, Volume 160, Issue 3–4, pp 207–218 | Cite as

Apomixis versus sexuality in blackberries (Rubus subgen.Rubus, Rosaceae)

  • Hilde Nybom


InRubus L. a connection seems to exist between the degree of meiotic disturbances on the one hand, and the production of unreduced embryo sacs, pollen fertility and relative seed set on the other hand. Severe meiotic disturbances commonly encountered in apomictic taxa decrease pollen fertility and thereby seed set since pollen is necessary for endosperm development. By contrast interspecific hybrids between apomictic taxa appear to be sexual and exhibit high pollen fertilities, probably due to an improved meiosis. Thus, apomixis leads to a decreased fertility inRubus, not the opposite, as often discussed.

Key words

Angiosperms Rosaceae Rubus Apomixis pseudogamy crossing experiments meiotic disturbances pollen fertility seed set 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Åkerberg, E., 1942: Cytogenetic studies inPoa pratensis and its hybrids withPoa alpina. — Hereditas28: 1–126.Google Scholar
  2. Asker, S., 1979: Progress in apomixis research. — Hereditas91: 231–240.Google Scholar
  3. Bammi, R. K., Olmo, H. P., 1966: Cytogenetics ofRubus. V. Natural hybridization betweenR. procerus P. J. Muell. andR. laciniatus Willd. — Evolution20: 617–633.Google Scholar
  4. Berger, X., 1953: Untersuchungen über die Embryologie partiell apomiktischerRubus-Arten. — Ber. Schweiz. Bot. Ges.63: 224–266.Google Scholar
  5. Christen, H. R., 1950: Untersuchungen über die Embryologie pseudogamer und sexuellerRubus-Arten. — Ber. Schweiz. Bot. Ges.60: 153–198.Google Scholar
  6. Clausen, J., 1954: Partial apomixis as an equilibrium system in evolution. — Caryologia6 (suppl.): 469–479.Google Scholar
  7. Craig, D. L., 1960: Studies on the cytology and the breeding behaviour ofRubus canadensis L. — Canad. J. Genet. Cytol.2: 96–102.Google Scholar
  8. Crane, M. B., 1940: Reproductive versatility inRubus. I. Morphology and inheritance. — J. Genet.40: 109–118.Google Scholar
  9. —, 1927: The origin of new forms inRubus. — Genetica9: 241–276.Google Scholar
  10. —, —, 1932: Chromatid segregation in tetraploidRubus. — Nature129: 869.Google Scholar
  11. Czapik, R., 1983: Embryological problems inRubus L. — InErdelska, O., (Ed.): Fertilization and embryogenesis in ovulated plants, pp. 375–379. — Bratislava: Veda.Google Scholar
  12. Darrow, G. M., Longley, A. E., 1933: Cytology and breeding ofRubus macropetalus, the Logan, and related blackberries. — J. Agric. Res.47: 315–330.Google Scholar
  13. —, 1933: Pseudogamy in blackberry crosses. — J. Heredity24: 313–315.Google Scholar
  14. De Wet, J. M. J., Stalker, H. T., 1974: Gametophytic apomixis and evolution in plants. — Taxon23: 689–697.Google Scholar
  15. Dowrick, G. J., 1966: Breeding systems in tetraploidRubus species. — Genet. Res.7: 243–253.Google Scholar
  16. Einset, J., 1951: Apomixis in American polyploid blackberries. — Amer. J. Bot.38: 768–772.Google Scholar
  17. Gerlach, D., 1965: Befruchtung und Autogamie beiRubus caesius. — Biol. Zentralbl.84: 611–633.Google Scholar
  18. Grazi, F., Umaerus, M., Åkerberg, E., 1961: Observations on the mode of reproduction and the embryology ofPoa pratensis. — Hereditas47: 489–541.Google Scholar
  19. Gustafsson, Å., 1943: The genesis of the European blackberry flora. — Lunds Univ. Årsskrift39 (6: 1–200.Google Scholar
  20. Haskell, G., 1960: Role of the male parent in crosses involving apomicticRubus species. — Heredity14: 101–113.Google Scholar
  21. Heslop-Harrison, Y., 1968:Rubus L. — InTutin, G & al. (Eds.): Flora Europaea2, pp. 7–25. — Cambridge: University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Jennings, D. L., Craig, D. L., Topham, P. B., 1967: The role of the male parent in the reproduction ofRubus. — Heredity22: 43–55.Google Scholar
  23. Kerr, E. A., 1954: Seed development in blackberries. — Canad. J. Bot.32: 654–672.Google Scholar
  24. Lidforss, B., 1905: Studier öfver artbildningen inom släktetRubus. I. — Arkiv Bot.4 (6: 1–41.Google Scholar
  25. —, 1907: Studier öfver artbildningen inom släktetRubus. II. — Arkiv Bot.6 (16: 1–43.Google Scholar
  26. Newton, A., 1975:Rubus L. — InStace, C. A., (Ed.): Hybridization and the flora of the British Isles, pp. 200–206. — London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  27. Nybom, H., 1980: Seed germination in Swedish blackberry species (Rubus L. subgen.Rubus). — Bot. Notiser133: 619–631.Google Scholar
  28. —, 1985: Pollen viability assessments in blackberries (Rubus subgen.Rubus). — Pl. Syst. Evol.150: 281–290.Google Scholar
  29. —, 1986a: Active self-pollination and pollen stainability in someRubus cultivars. — J. Hortic. Sci.61: 49–55.Google Scholar
  30. —, 1986b: Chromosome numbers and reproduction inRubus subgen.Malachobatus. — Pl. Syst. Evol.152: 211–218.Google Scholar
  31. —, 1987: Pollen-limited seed set in pseudogamous blackberries (Rubus L. subgen.Rubus). — Oecologia (Berlin)72: 562–568.Google Scholar
  32. Peitersen, A. K., 1921: Blackberries of New England—genetic status of the plants. — Vermont Agric. Expt. Sta., Bull.218: 1–34.Google Scholar
  33. Petrov, D. F., 1939: On the occurrence of facultative pseudogamy in a triploid variety of raspberries, Immer tragende (R. idaeus). — Compt. Rend. l'Acad. Sci. l'U.R.S.S.22: 352–353.Google Scholar
  34. Pratt, C., Einset, J., 1955: Development of the embryo sac in some American blackberries. — Amer. J. Bot.42: 637–645.Google Scholar
  35. —, —, Clausen, R. T., 1958: Embryology, breeding behaviour and morphological characteristics of apomictic, triploidRubus idaeus L. — Bull. Torrey Bot. Club85: 242–254.Google Scholar
  36. Rozanova, M. A., 1938: On polymorphic type of species' origin. — Compt. Rend. l'Acad. Sci. l'U.R.S.S.18: 677–680.Google Scholar
  37. Thomas, P. B., 1940: Reproductive versatility inRubus. II. The chromosomes and development. — J. Genet.40: 119–128.Google Scholar
  38. Weber, H. E., 1973: Die GattungRubus (Rosaceae) im nordwestlichen Europa. — Lehre: J. Cramer.Google Scholar
  39. Williamson, C. J., 1981: Variability in seedling progenies and the effect of light regimes during seed production on interspecific hybrids ofPoa. — New Phytol.87: 785–797.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1988

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hilde Nybom
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Systematic BotanyUniversity of LundLundSweden

Personalised recommendations