Summary
1. Experiments are described which are designed to compare diploid and tetraploid tomatoes from the standpoint of growth and total size. The data are treated by analysis of variance.
2. It is shown that tetraploids do not differ consistently from diploids in the total amount of substance produced. Polyploidy interacts in a complex way with the genotype to produce small deviations from a constant growth rate.
3. Tetraploid embryos are about 30 per cent heavier than the diploid, but this advantage is lost during germination.
4. Tetraploids do not differ significantly from diploids in their water content.
5. Heterosis in theF 2 is only due to increased initial weight, and it is of the same magnitude in diploids and tetraploids.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Allen, C. E. (1935). “The occurrence of polyploidy inSphaerocarpos.”Amer. J. Bot.22, 635–44.
Andersson-Kottö, I. (1936). “On the comparative development of alternating generations, with special reference to ferns.”Svensk bot. Tidskr.30, 57–78.
Ashby, E. (1930). “Studies in the inheritance of physiological characters. I. A physiological investigation of the nature of hybrid vigour in maize.”Ann. Bot.44, 457–67.
—— (1932). “Studies in the inheritance of physiological characters. II. Further experiments upon the basis of hybrid vigour and upon the inheritance of efficiency index and respiration rate in maize.” Ibid.46, 1007–33.
Becker, G. (1932). “Experimentelle Analyse der Genom und Plasmonwirkung bei Moosen. III.”Z. indukt. Abstamm.-u. VererbLehre,60, 17–38.
Blackman, V. H. (1919). “The compound interest law and plant growth.”Ann. Bot.33, 353–360.
Bolas, B. D. &Melville, R. (1933). “The influence of the environment on the growth and metabolism of the tomato plant. I. Methods, technique and preliminary results.” Ibid.47, 673–88.
Fisher, R. A. (1935).The Design of Experiments. Pp. 252. Edinburgh.
-- (1936).Statistical Methods for Research Workers, 6th ed. Pp. 336. Edinburgh.
Jörgensen, C. A. (1928). “The experimental formation of heteroploid plants in the genusSolanum.”J. Genet.19, 133–211.
Kostoff, D. &Aksamitnaja, K. (1935). “Studies on polyploid plants. IX.”C.R. Acad. Sci. U.S.S.R.34, 293–7.
MacArthur, J. W. (1931). “Linkage studies with the tomato.”Trans. roy. Canad. Inst.18, 1–19.
MacHenry, E. W. &Graham, M. (1935). “Observations on the estimationof ascorbic acid by titration.”Biochem. J.29, 2013–19.
Muntzing, A. (1936). “The evolutionary significance of autoploidy.”Hereditas,21, 263–378.
Sansome, F. W. (1933). “Chromatid segregation inSolanum Lycopersicum.”J. Genet.27, 105–32.
Sansome, F. W. &Zilva, S. S. (1933). “Polyploidy and vitamin C.”Biochem. J.27, 1935–41.
—— —— (1936). “Polyploidy and vitamin C.”Biochem. J. 30, 54–6.
Schwarzenbach, M. (1926). “Regeneration und Aposporie bei Anthoceros.”Arch. Klaus-Stift. VererbForsch.2, 91–141.
Su, Thet M. &Ashby, E. (1929). “The interaction of factors in the growth of Lemna II. Technique for the estimation of dry weight.”Ann. Bot.43, 329–32.
Wettstein, F. v. (1932). “Genetics of mosses.” Verdoorn’sManual of Bryology, pp. 233–272. The Hague: Nijhoff.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
In part adapted from a thesis accepted for the degree of Ph.D. of the University of London.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Fabergé, A.C. The physiological consequences of polyploidy. Journ. of Genetics 33, 365–382 (1936). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02982893
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02982893