Plant Systematics and Evolution

, Volume 152, Issue 3–4, pp 267–276 | Cite as

Dimorphic exine sculpturing in two distylous species ofDyerophytum (Plumbaginaceae)

  • Magda O. Weber-El Ghobary
Article

Abstract

Light and SEM observations on the pollen ofDyerophytum africanum andD. indicum have revealed marked differences in exine features. These distylous species also have dimorphic pollen. In the short-styled individuals of both species, the sexine and nexine are of equal thickness, and the clava-like sexinous processes are short without marked projections. In the long-styled individuals, the sexine is thicker than the nexine, the clavae are higher than broad with an apical spinule. Pollen size and apertures are identical in both morphs. — Palynological evidence is presented for relationships betweenDyerophytum andCeratostigma, Plumbago andAegialitis. Moreover, the genusDyerophytum exhibits pollen morphological similarities with some species ofLinum (Linaceae).

Key words

Angiosperms Plumbaginaceae Dyerophytum africanum D. indicum Ceratostigma abyssinicum Linum Distyly dimorphic pollen exine sculpturing 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Baker, H. G., 1948a: Dimorphism and monomorphism in thePlumbaginaceae. I. A survey of the family. — Ann. Bot. (London)12(47, 207–219.Google Scholar
  2. —, 1948b: Relationships in thePlumbaginaceae. — Nature161, p. 400.Google Scholar
  3. —, 1948c: Significance of pollen dimorphism in late-glacialArmeria. — Nature161, 770–771.Google Scholar
  4. —, 1953a: Dimorphism and monomorphism in thePlumbaginaceae. II. Pollen and stigmata in the genusLimonium. — Ann. Bot. (London)17(67, 433–445.Google Scholar
  5. —, 1953b: Dimorphism and monomorphism in thePlumbaginaceae. III. Correlation of geographical distribution patterns with dimorphism inLimonium. — Ann. Bot. (London)17(68, 615–627.Google Scholar
  6. —, 1954: Dimorphism and incompatibility in thePlumbaginaceae. — Rapp. et Comm. 8ème Congr. Int. de Bot., Paris, sect.10, 133–134.Google Scholar
  7. —, 1966: The evolution functioning and breakdown of heteromorphic incompatibility system. I. The familyPlumbaguinaceae. — Evolution20(3, 349–368.Google Scholar
  8. Balfour, B., 1888: Botany of Socotra. — Trans. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh31, 148–151.Google Scholar
  9. Bentham, G., Hooker, J. D., 1876:Plumbaginaceae. — Genera Plantarum2, 623–628.Google Scholar
  10. Boissier, E. P., 1848:Plumbaginaceae. — Inde Candolle, A. P., (Ed.): Prodromus Systematis Naturalis Regni Vegetabilis12, 617–696. — Paris: V. Masson.Google Scholar
  11. Bokhari, M. H., 1972: A brief review of stigma and pollen types inAcantholimon andLimonium. — Notes Roy. Bot. Gard. Edinburgh32(1, 79–84.Google Scholar
  12. Dahlgren, K. V. O., 1918: Heterostylie innerhalb der GattungPlumbago. — Svensk. Bot. Tidskr.12(3, 362–372.Google Scholar
  13. —, 1923:Cerratostigma, eine heterostyle Gattung. — Ber. Deutsch. Bot. Ges.41, 35–38.Google Scholar
  14. —, 1970: Heterostylie beiDyerophytum indicum (Gib exWight) O. K. (Plumbaginaceae). — Svensk. Bot. Tidskr.64(2, 180–184.Google Scholar
  15. Dulberger, R., 1975: Intermorph structural differences between stigmatic papillae and pollen grain in relation to incompatibility inPlumbaginaceae. — Proc. Roy. Soc. London, Ser. B, Biol. Sci.188, 257–274.Google Scholar
  16. Duthie, J. F., 1911: Flora of the upper Gangetic Plain, II, 1–3. — Calcutta.Google Scholar
  17. Dvoskin, S., 1969: Reproductive systems in some of thePlumbaginaceae in Israel. — M. Sc. Thesis, Tel Aviv Univ. (Hebrew with English summary).Google Scholar
  18. Dyer, R. A., Codd, L. E., Rycroft, M. P., 1963: Flora of Southern Africa26, 15–31. — Pretoria.Google Scholar
  19. Eckhardt, Th., 1964:Plumbaqinales. — InMelchoir, H., (Ed.): A. Englers Syllabus der Pflanzenfamilien2, 12 ed., 394–396. — Berlin Nikolassee: Gebr. Borntraeger.Google Scholar
  20. Erdtman, G., 1940: Flower dimorphism inStatice armeria L. — Svensk. Bot. Tidskr.34(4, 376–380.Google Scholar
  21. —, 1960: The acetolysis method. A revised description. — Svensk. Bot. Tidskr.54(4, 561–564.Google Scholar
  22. —, 1966: Pollen Morphology and Plant Taxonomy. Angiosperms (An Introduction to Palynology I), 325–327. — New York: Hafner Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  23. —, 1969: Handbook of Palynology. An Introduction to the study of Pollen Grains and Spores. — Copenhagen: Munksgaard, 486 pp.Google Scholar
  24. —, 1970: Über Pollendimorphie inPlumbaginaceae-Plumbagineae (Unter besonderer Berücksichtigung vonDyerophytum indicum). — Svensk. Bot. Tidskr.64(2, 184–188.Google Scholar
  25. Fernandez, I., Devesa, I. M., 1983: Nuevos casos de dimorphismo polinico en el géneroArmeria. — Actas del IV Simposio de Palinologia, Ed. Univ. Barcelona, 71–84.Google Scholar
  26. Friedrich, H. Ch., 1956: Studien über die natürliche Verwandtschaft derPlumbaginales, Primulales undCentrospermae. — Dissertation, München, 101 pp.Google Scholar
  27. Heiz, B., 1981: Observations sur la séparation des éléments de l'hétérostyle chez le Lin. — Compt. Rend. Hebd. Séances Acad. Sci.292, 735–740.Google Scholar
  28. Hideux, M., 1972: Techniques d'étude du pollen au MEB: effets comparés des différents traitements physiochimiques. — Micron3, 1–31.Google Scholar
  29. Hooker, J. D., 1882: The Flora of British India.3,Caprifoliaceae toApocynaceae, pp. 478–481. — London.Google Scholar
  30. Iversen, J., 1940: Blütenbiologische Studien. I. Dimorphie und Monomorphie beiArmeria. — Kongel. Danske Vidensk. — Selsk. Skr.XV, 8, 1–39.Google Scholar
  31. Kulczynski, S., 1932: Die altdiluvialenDryas-Floren der Gegend von Przemysl. — Acta Soc. Bot. Poloniae9, 237–299.Google Scholar
  32. Kuntze, O., 1893: Revisio Generum Plantarum III. — Paris, 110–193.Google Scholar
  33. Labbe, A., 1962: Les Plombaqinacées: Structure, développement, répartition, conséquences en systématique. — Travaux des Laboratoires de Biologie végétale de Grenoble, Grenoble, 113 pp.Google Scholar
  34. Lotan, Y., 1979: Ontogenetic development of distylous system inPlumbago europaea andP. capensis. — M. Sc. Thesis, Tel Aviv Univ. (Hebrew with English summary).Google Scholar
  35. McCleod, J., 1887: Untersuchungen über die Befruchtung der Blumen. — Bot. Centralbl.29, 150–154.Google Scholar
  36. Mathur, K. L., Khan, R., 1941: The development of the embryo-sac ofVogelia indica. — Proc. Indian Acad. Sci.13, 360–368.Google Scholar
  37. Maury, P., 1886: Etudes sur l'organisation et la distribution géographique des Plombaginacées. — Ann. Sci. Nat. (Paris)IV(1, 1–134.Google Scholar
  38. Müller, F. von, 1868: Notizen über Geschlechtverhältnisse brasilianischer Pflanzen. — Bot. Zeitung (Berlin)26(8, 113–115.Google Scholar
  39. Nowicke, J. W., Skvarla, J. J., 1977: Pollen morphology and relationship of thePlumbaginaceae, Polygonaceae andPrimulaceae to the orderCentrospermae. — Smithson. Contrib. Bot. Washington37, 1–64.Google Scholar
  40. Ockendon, D. J., 1968: Biosystematic studies in theLinum perenne group. — New Phytol.67(4, 787–813.Google Scholar
  41. —, 1971: Cytology and pollen morphology of natural and artificial tetraploids in theLinum perenne group. — New Phytol.70, 599–605.Google Scholar
  42. Philipp, M., 1974: Morphological and genetical studies in theArmeria maritima aggregate. — Bot. Tidskr.69(1, 40–45.Google Scholar
  43. Phillips, E. P., 1951: The Genera of South African Flowering Plants. 2nd. ed., 468–469. — Government Printer, Pretoria.Google Scholar
  44. Punt, W., den Breejen, P., 1981: The Northwest European Flora,27.Linaceae. Rev. Palaeobot. Palynol.33, 75–115.Google Scholar
  45. Roca, A., 1983: Morphologia polinica del géneroLimonium Willd. — Actas del IV Simposio de Palinologia. Ed. Univ. Barcelona, 201–211.Google Scholar
  46. Rogers, C. M., 1979: Distyly and pollen dimorphism inLinum suffruticosum (Linaceae). — Pl. Syst. Evol.131, 127–132.Google Scholar
  47. Saad, S. I., 1961a: Pollen morphology and sporoderm stratification inLinum. — Grana Palynol.3(1, 110–125.Google Scholar
  48. —, 1961b: A tentative outline of some trends in the phylogenetic development of exine stratification. — Grana Palynol.3(1, 127–129.Google Scholar
  49. —, 1961c: Palynological studies in theLinaceae. — Pollen & Spores4(1, 65–82.Google Scholar
  50. —, 1961d: Phylogenetic development in the apertural mechanism ofLinum pollen grains. — Pollen & Spores3(1, 33–43.Google Scholar
  51. Szafer, W., 1945: The fossilArmeria in the European Pleistocene especially in Poland. — Starunia20, 1–31, Krakow.Google Scholar
  52. Thonner, F., 1908: Blütenpflanzen Afrikas. Eine Anleitung zum Bestimmen der Gattungen der Afrikanischen Siphonogamen. — Fam.187 Plumbaginaceae, p. 447, Taf. 124. — Berlin: Friedländer & Sohn.Google Scholar
  53. Turner, S. C., Blackmore, S., 1984: The Northwest European Pollen Flora,36 Plumbaginaceae. — Rev. Palaeobot. Palynol.42, 133–154.Google Scholar
  54. Vuilleumier, B. S., 1967: The origin and evolutionary development of heterostyly in the Angiosperms. — Evolution21, 210–226.Google Scholar
  55. Weber, M. O., 1981: Pollen diversity and identification in somePlumbaginaceae. — Pollen & Spores23(3/4, 321–348.Google Scholar
  56. Weber-El Ghobary, M. O., 1984: The systematic relationships ofAegialitis (Plumbaginaceae) as revealed by pollen morphology. — Pl. Syst. Evol.144, 53–58.Google Scholar
  57. Wight, R., 1843: Icones Plantarum Indiae Orientalis.II(IV, 5–6, pl. 1075. — Madras.Google Scholar
  58. Wilson, J., 1890: The mucilage and other glands of thePlumbaginaceae. — Ann. Bot.IV, XIV, 231–258, pl. 10–13.Google Scholar
  59. Wright, C. H., 1906:Plumbaginaceae. — InThiselton-Dyer, W. T., (Ed.): Flora Capensis.,IV, Sect. 1, Part II, 418–426. — London.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1986

Authors and Affiliations

  • Magda O. Weber-El Ghobary
    • 1
  1. 1.Département de Géologie et de PaléontologieUniversité de GenèveSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations