, Volume 63, Issue 1, pp 61–66 | Cite as

Hieracium subgen. Pilosella: pollen stainability in sexual, apomictic and sterile plants

  • Olga RotreklováEmail author
Full Paper


Two pollen stainability tests (Alexander’s stain and acetocarmine) were used to detect differences in pollen viability of the sexual, apomictic and sterile plants of Hieracium subgen. Pilosella. In sexual taxa (Hieracium bauhini and H. densiflorum), the average stainability was 93.7–98.4%. Similarly high stainability (92.2–97.2%) was found in the apomictic Hieracium pilosellinum and in the majority of the apomictic populations (or plants) of the pentaploid and hexaploid H. bauhini. In some apomictic plants of Hieracium bauhini the average pollen stainability was 49.0–75.4%. The lowest pollen stainability was found in the sterile plants, i.e. the triploid H. pistoriense (33.6%) and the pentaploid H. brachiatum (29.6%).

Key words

Hieracium bauhini H. brachiatum H. densiflorum H. pilosellinum H. pistoriense acetocarmine Alexander’s stain reproduction mode 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Alexander M.P. 1969. Differential staining of aborted and nonaborted pollen. Stain Technol. 44: 117–122.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Alexander M.P. 1980. A versatile stain for pollen, fungi, yeast, and bacteria. Stain Technol. 55: 13–18.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Aparicio A. 1994. Karyological studies in Hieracium baeticum (Asteraceae) from the “Parque Natural de la Sierra de Grazalena” (Souther Spain). Flora Mediterranea 4: 25–34.Google Scholar
  4. Báez P., Riveros M. & Lehnback C. 2002. Viability and longevity of pollen of Notofagus species in south Chile. New Zealand J. Bot. 40: 671–678.Google Scholar
  5. Bicknell R.A. 1997. Isolation of a diploid, apomictic plant of Hieracium aurantiacum. Sexual Pl. Reprod. 10: 168–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bolat I. & Pirlak L. 1999. An investigation of pollen viability, germination and tube growth in some stone fruits. Tr. J. Agr. Forest. 23: 383–388.Google Scholar
  7. Busch J.W. 2005. Inbreeding depression in self-incompatible and self-compatible populations of Leavenworthia alabamica. Heredity 94: 159–165.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chapman H.M. & Bicknell R.A. 2000. Recovery of a sexual and an apomictic hybrid from crosses between the facultative apomicts Hieracium caespitosum and H. prealtum. New Zealand J. Ecol. 24: 81–86.Google Scholar
  9. Chrtek J. jun. 1997. Taxonomy of the Hieracium alpinum group in the Sudeten Mts., the West and the Ukrainian East Carpathians. Folia Geobot. Phytotax. 32: 69–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dafni A. 1992. Pollination ecology. A practical approach. Oxford University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  11. Gadella Th.W.J. 1987. Sexual tetraploid and apomictic pentaploid populations of Hieracium pilosella (Compositae). Pl. Syst. Evol. 157: 219–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gadella Th.W.J. 1991. Variation, hybridization and reproductive biology of Hieracium pilosella L. Proc. Koninkl. Nederl. Akad. Wetensch., ser. C 94: 455–488.Google Scholar
  13. Gadella Th.W.J. 1992. Notes on some triple and intersectional hybrids in Hieracium L. subgenus Pilosella (Hill) S.F. Gray. Proc. Koninkl. Nederl. Akad. Wetensch., ser. C 95: 51–63.Google Scholar
  14. Gustafsson Å. 1938. The cytological differentiation of male and female organs in parthenogenetic species. Biol. Zentralbl. 58: 608–616.Google Scholar
  15. Gustafsson Å. 1946. Apomixis in higher plants. Part I. The mechanism of apomixis. Acta Univ. Lund. 42: 1–67.Google Scholar
  16. Houliston G.J. & Chapman H.M. 2001. Sexual reproduction in field populations of the facultative apomict, Hieracium pilosella. New Zealand J. Bot. 39: 141–149.Google Scholar
  17. Krahulcová A. & Krahulec F. 2000. Offspring diversity in Hieracium subgen. Pilosella (Asteraceae): new cytotypes from hybridization experiments and from open pollination. Fragm. Flor. Geobot. 45: 239–255.Google Scholar
  18. Krahulcová A., Krahulec F. & Chapman H.M. 2000. Variation in Hieracium subgen. Pilosella (Asteraceae): what do we know about its sources? Folia Geobot. 35: 319–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Krahulcová A., Krahulec F. & Kirschner J. 1996. Introgressive hybridization between a native and an introduced species: Viola lutea subsp. sudetica versus V. tricolor. Folia Geobot. Phytotax. 31: 219–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Krahulcová A., Papoušková S. & Krahulec F. 2004. Reproduction mode in the allopolyploid facultatively apomictic hawkweed Hieracium rubrum (Asteraceae, H. subgen. Pilosella). Hereditas 141: 19–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lévesque-Lemay M., Albani D., Aldcorn D., Hammerlindl J., Keller W. & Robert L.S. 2003. Exspression of CCAAT-binding factor antisense transcripts in reproductive tissues affects plant fertility. Plant Cell Rep. 21: 804–808.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Merxmüller H. 1975. Diploide Hieracien. Anales Inst. Bot. Cavanilles 32: 189–196.Google Scholar
  23. Pogan E. & Wcisło H. 1995. Embryological analysis of Hieracium pilosella L. from Poland. Acta Biol. Cracov., ser. bot. 37: 53–61.Google Scholar
  24. Rodriguez-Riano T. & Dafni A. 2000. A new procedure to assess pollen viability. Sexual Pl. Reprod. 12: 241–244.Google Scholar
  25. Rosenberg O. 1917. Die Reduktionsteilung und ihre Degeneration in Hieracium. Svensk. Bot. Tidskr. 11: 145–206.Google Scholar
  26. Rosenberg O. 1927. Die semiheterotypische Teilung und ihre Bedeutung für die Entstehung verdoppelter Chromosomenzahlen. Hereditas 8: 305–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Rotreklová O. 2004 Hieracium bauhini group in Central Europe: chromosome numbers and breeding systems. Preslia 76: 313–330.Google Scholar
  28. Rotreklová O., Krahulcová A., Vaňková D., Peckert T. & Mráz P. 2002. Chromosome numbers and breeding systems in some species of Hieracium subgen. Pilosella from Central Europe. Preslia 74: 27–44.Google Scholar
  29. Rotreklová O., Krahulcová A., Mráz P., Mrázová V., Mártonfiová L., Peckert T. & Šingliarová B. 2005. Chromosome numbers and breeding systems of some European species of Hieracium subgen. Pilosella. Preslia 77: 177–195.Google Scholar
  30. Skalińska M. 1971. Experimental and embryological studies in Hieracium aurantiacum L. Acta Biol. Cracov., ser. bot. 13: 111–117.Google Scholar
  31. Slade K. & Rich T. 2006. Pollen studies in British Hieracium section Alpina. In: Vreš B. & Babij V. (eds), Abstracts of lectures and posters of the 9th International Hieracium Workshop, Trenta (Julian Alps), Slovenia, 6–11 September, 2006. Jovan Hadži Institute of Biology, Scientific Research Centre SASA, Ljubljana, p. 27.Google Scholar
  32. Song Z.P., Lu B.R. & Chen J.K. 2001. A study of pollen viability and longevity in Oryza rufipogon, O. sativa, and their hybrids. Inter. Rice Res. Notes 26(2): 31–32.Google Scholar
  33. Stone J.L., Thomson J.D. & Dent-Acosta S.J. 1995. Assessment of pollen viability in hand-pollination experiments: a review. Am. J. Bot. 82: 1186–1197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Tyagi A.P. 2002. Chromosomal pairing and pollen viability in Rhizophora mangle and Rhizophora stylosa hybrids. S. Pac. J. Nat. Sci. 20: 1–3.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Institute of Botany, Slovak Academy of Sciences 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Botany and Zoology, Faculty of ScienceMasaryk UniversityBrnoCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations