Enigma of apogamety

Summary

Apogamety, the occurrence of which has been either denied or criticized by some authors, presents several problems that should be carefully considered in argumentation. Gynogenesis, which comprises zygotic, parthenogenetic, and apogametic embryos, an actively developing branch of tissue culture, is of no help here being itself subject to similar criticism. The discussion on apogamety awaits methodological progress which would yield answers to the following questions: are all cells of embryo sac potentially gametic; in what way are the mechanisms of cell differentiation and specialization of cells within embryo sac correlated with their totipotency; what are the limitations of plant cell totipotency in embryo sacs. The above problems of apogamety are not only an enigma for embryology and reproduction of angiosperms but they belong also to the crucial problems of the general biology which might be solved by studies of corresponding molecular mechanisms and experiments in tissue culture.

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

References

  1. Battaglia E (1963) Apomixis. In: Maheshwari P (ed) Recent advances in embryology of the angiosperms. Catholic Press, Ranchi, India, pp 221–264

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bohanec B (1994) Induction of gynogenesis in agricultural crops: a review. In: Proceedings of IPBA, Rogla, December 5–7, 1994, pp 43–55

  3. Bossoutrot D, Hasemans D (1985) Gynogenesis inBeta vulgaris: from in vitro culture of unpollinated ovules to the production of doubled haploid plants in soil. Plant Cell Rep 4: 300–303

    Google Scholar 

  4. Chaubal R, Reger BJ (1992) Calcium in the synergid cells and other regions of pearl millet ovaries. Sex Plant Reprod 3: 34–46

    Google Scholar 

  5. Czapik R (1997) Theoretical aspects of apogamety in angiosperms. Bull Pol Acad Sci 45: 2–4

    Google Scholar 

  6. Cooper DC (1943) Haploid-diploid twin embryos in Lilium and Nicotiana. Am J Bot 30: 408–413

    Google Scholar 

  7. Favre-Duchartre M (1977) Eight interpretations of embryo sac. Phytomorphology 27: 407–418

    Google Scholar 

  8. Gerassimova-Navashina EN (1958) Gametophyte, basic developmental features and function of reproductive elements in angiosperms. Probl Bot 3: 125–167 (in Russian)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Gu S-R, Gui Y-L, Xu T-Y (1985) Induction of endospermal plantlets in Lycium. Acta Bot Sin 27: 106–108

    Google Scholar 

  10. Gustafsson A (1946) Apomixis in higher plants I: the mechanism of apomixis. Lunds Univ Arsskr Avd 242: 1–66

    Google Scholar 

  11. Huang Q-F, Yang H-Y, Zhou C (1982) Embryological observations on ovary culture of unpollinated young flowers inHordeum vulgare L. Acta Bot Sin 24: 296–300

    Google Scholar 

  12. Johanson A (1950) Plant embryology. Chronica Botanica, Waldham, Mass

    Google Scholar 

  13. Johri BM, Ambegaokar KB (1984) Embryology: then and now. In: Johri BM (ed) Embryology of angiosperms. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York Tokyo, pp 1–52

    Google Scholar 

  14. —, Ambegaokar KB, Srivastava PS (1992) Comparative embryology of angiosperms, vol 1. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York Tokyo

    Google Scholar 

  15. Kamelina O (1995) Synergid apogamety in the genusTetradiclis Stev. (Tetradiclidaceae) and occurrence of this phenomenon in flowering plants. Apomixis Newsl 8: 32–33

    Google Scholar 

  16. Li G-M, Yang H-Y (1986) Further embryological studies on the in vitro apogamy inOryza sativa L. Acta Bot Sin 28: 229–234

    Google Scholar 

  17. Liu Y-S, Sun J-S, Wang F-H (1994) Cytoembryological studies on polyembryonic line SB-1 ofOryza sativa: polyembryony and its origin. Acta Bot Sin 36: 821–826

    Google Scholar 

  18. Nakano H, Tashiro T, Maeda E (1975) Plant differentiation in callus tissue induced from immature endosperm ofOryza sativa L. Z Pflanzenphysiol 76: 444–449

    Google Scholar 

  19. Naumova TN, Yakovlev MS (1975) Development of embryonic structures inTrillium camschatcense Ker.-Gawl. after pollination. Bot Zh 60: 627–635 (in Russian)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Nogler GA (1984) Gametophytic apomixis. In: Johri BM (ed) Embryology of angiosperms. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York Tokyo, pp 475–518

    Google Scholar 

  21. Renner O (1916) Zur Terminologie der pflanzlichen Generationswechsel. Biol Zentralbl 36: 337–374

    Google Scholar 

  22. Rutishauser A (1967) Fortpflanzungsmodus und Meiose apomiktischer Blütenpflanzen. Springer, Wien New York

    Google Scholar 

  23. Schürhoff PN (1922) Zur Polyembryonie vonAllium odorum. Ber Dtsch Bot Ges 11: 374–381

    Google Scholar 

  24. Solntseva PM (1969) Principles of embryological classification of apomixis in angiosperms. Rev Cytol Biol Veg 32: 371–377

    Google Scholar 

  25. Solntseva PM (1995) Letters. Apomixis Newsl 8: 55–57

    Google Scholar 

  26. Srivastava PS (1973) Formation of triploid plantlets in endosperm cultures ofPutrajwa rox burghi. Z Pflanzenphysiol 69: 270–273

    Google Scholar 

  27. Tian H-Q, Yang H-Y (1983) Synergid apogamy and egg cell anomalous division in cultured ovaries ofOryza sativa L. Acta Bot Sin 25: 403–408

    Google Scholar 

  28. Yakovlev MS (1974) Gametogenesis, embryo sac and pollen grain (contribution to the problem of the origin of Angiospermae). Bot Zh 59: 1712–1727 (in Russian)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to R. Czapik.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Czapik, R. Enigma of apogamety. Protoplasma 208, 206–210 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01279091

Download citation

Keywords

  • Apomixis
  • Synergidal apogamety
  • Antipodal apogamety
  • Endospermal apogamety, Gynogenesis
  • Parthenogenesis