, Volume 67, Issue 1, pp 87–96 | Cite as

Morphological studies of pollen grains of the Polish endemic species of the genus Rubus (Rosaceae)

  • Dorota Wrońska-Pilarek
  • Andrzej M. Jagodziński
  • Tomasz Maliński
Section Botany


The pollen of six taxa of the genus Rubus endemic to Poland (R. capitulatus, R. chaerophylloides, R. ostroviensis, R. posnaniensis, R. seebergensis and R. spribillei)was studied using light and scanning electron microscopy. The study objective was to extend the knowledge of the species pollen morphology and to investigate whether pollen morphology may help to taxonomically distinguish a very rare bramble species. Study material was derived from six natural localities where the species occur in the Wielkopolska region (Poland). Ten quantitative pollen grain features were analysed as well as the following qualitative ones: outline, shape, type of bridge and exine sculpture. Only mature, correctly formed pollen grains (30 per specimen) were measured and 180 pollen grains were examined in total. It was found that R. capitulatus and R. seebergensis had the highest mean values of P, E and Le features. In addition, pollen grains of R. capitulatus were most flattened (mean P/E ratio equals 1.14), while those of R. seebergensis were most elongated (mean P/E ratio equals 1.27). R. spribillei was the only species with striae of similar width as muri, whereas striae in the remaining species were wider. R. chaerophylloides and R. posnaniensis were characterised by specific, similar exine sculpture. Nevertheless, it should be stated that differences between pollen features of the species studied are so small and the variability of these features are so large that it is difficult to clearly identify the species studied. Therefore, pollen grain morphology can serve only as an auxiliary feature for the determination of these species.

Key words

Rubus endemic species pollen morphology Poland 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Boratyńska K. & Lewandowska D. 2009. Differences among three populations of Pinus uliginosa and their relation to P. sylvestris as expressed by the needle characters. Dendrobiology 61: 37–46.Google Scholar
  2. Eide F. 1981a. Key for Northwest European Rosaceae pollen. Grana 20: 101–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Eide F. 1981b. On the pollen morphology of Rubus chamaemorus L. (Rosaceae). Grana 20: 25–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Erdtman G. 1952. Pollen Morphology and Plant Taxonomy. Angiosperms. An Introduction to Palynology 1. Almquist & Wiksell, Stockholm, 539 pp.Google Scholar
  5. Erdtman G., Berglund B. & Praglowski J. 1961. An Introduction to a Scandinavian Pollen Flora. Almqvist & Wiksell, Stockholm, 91 pp.Google Scholar
  6. Faegri K. & Iversen J. 1989. Textbook of Pollen Analysis. 4th ed., John Wiley & Sons. Chichester, 328 pp.Google Scholar
  7. Fedoronchuk M.M. & Savitsky V.D. 1987. Comparative and morphological analysis of pollen for genera of the family Rosaceae Juss. of the Ukrainian flora. Ukr. Bot. Zhurn. 44(2): 32–38.Google Scholar
  8. Gonzalez Romano M.L. & Candau P.A. 1989. Contribution to palynological studies in the Rosaceae. Acta Bot. Malac. 14: 105–116.Google Scholar
  9. Hebda R.J. & Chinnappa C.C. 1990. Studies on pollen morphology of Rosaceae in Canada. Rev. Palaeob. Palynol. 64: 103–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hebda R.J. & Chinnappa C.C. 1994. Studies on pollen morphology of Rosaceae. Acta Bot. Gall. 141: 183–193.Google Scholar
  11. Hesse M., Halbritter H., Zetter R., Weber M., Buchner R., Frosch-Radivo A. & Ulrich S. 2009. Pollen Terminology. An illustrated handbook. Springer, Vienna, 264 pp.Google Scholar
  12. Kosenko V.N., Nguen T.H. & Jacovlev G.P. 1982. Palynomorphological study of the representatives of the genus Rubus (Rosaceae) in the flora of Vietnam. Bot. Zhurn. 69(4): 497–503.Google Scholar
  13. Kuprianova L.A. & Alyoshina L.A. 1978. Pollen dicotyledoneaerum Florae Partis Europareae. URSS. Lamiaceae-Zygophyllaceae. Nauka, Akad. Sci. USSR, L. Komarov. Inst. Bot., 184 pp.Google Scholar
  14. Li W.L., He S.A., Gu Y., Shu P. & Pu Z.M. 2001. Pollen morphology of the genus Rubus from China. Acta Phyto. Sin. 39(3): 234–247.Google Scholar
  15. Maliński T. 2001. Rodzaj Rubus L. w południowej Wielkopolsce. Rocz. Dendrol. 49: 13–95.Google Scholar
  16. Mazur M., Klajbor K., Kielich M., Sowińska M., Romo A., Montserrat J.M. & Boratyński A. 2010. Intra-specific differentiation of Juniperus phoenicea in the western Mediterranean region revealed in morphological multivariate analysis. Dendrobiology 63: 21–31.Google Scholar
  17. Monasterio-Huelin E. & Pardo C. 1995. Pollen morphology and wall stratification in Rubus L. (Rosaceae) in the Iberian Peninsula. Grana 34: 229–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Moore P.D., Webb J.A. & Collinson M.E. 1991. Pollen analysis. Blackwell Scientific Publications, London, 216 pp.Google Scholar
  19. Naruhashi N. & Takano H. 1980. Size variation of pollen grains in some Rubus species. J. Phytogeogr. Taxon. 28(1): 27–32.Google Scholar
  20. Punt W., Hoen P.P., Blackmore S., Nilsson S. & Le Thomas A. 2007. Glossary of pollen and spore terminology. Rev. Palaeobot. Palynol. 143(1–2): 1–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Reitsma T.J. 1966. Pollen morphology of some European Rosaceae. Acta Bot. Neerl. 15: 290–379.Google Scholar
  22. Reitsma T.J. 1969. Size modification on recent pollen grains under different treatments. Rev. Palaeobot. Palynol. 9: 175–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Sobierajska K., Boratyńska K. & Marcysiak K. 2010. Variation of cone characters in Pinus mugo (Pinaceae) populations in the Giant Mountains (Karkonosze, Sudetes). Dendrobiology 63: 33–41.Google Scholar
  24. Stace C.A. 1989. Plant Taxonomy and Biosystematics. 2nd ed. Edward Arnold, London, 288 pp.Google Scholar
  25. Teppner H. 1965. Zur Kenntnis der Gattung Waldsteinia L. Phyton 3(4): 224–238.Google Scholar
  26. Tomlik-Wyremblewska A. 1995. Pollen morphology of genus Rubus L. Part I. Introductory studies of the European representatives of the subgenus Rubus L. Acta Soc. Bot. Pol. 64(2): 187–203.Google Scholar
  27. Tomlik-Wyremblewska A. 2000. Pollen morphology of genus Rubus L. Part II. Introductory studies on the Malesian species of subgenus Micranthobatus Fritsch. Acta Soc. Bot. Pol. 69(1): 31–40.Google Scholar
  28. Tomlik-Wyremblewska A., van der Ham R.W.J.M. & Kosiński P. 2004. Pollen morphology of genus Rubus L. Part III. Studies on the Malesian species of subgenera Chamaebatus L. and Idaeobatus L. Acta Soc. Bot. Pol. 73(3): 207–227.Google Scholar
  29. Ueda Y. & Tomita H. 1989. Morphometric analysis of pollen patterns in Roses. J. Japan. Soc. Hort. Sci. 58(1): 211–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Ueda Y. 1992. Pollen surface morphology in the genus Rosa, related genera. Jap. J. Palynol. 38(2): 94–105.Google Scholar
  31. Wang X.R., Tang H.R., Huang L.H., Zong Z.D., Xiao L.F., Hua Q.D. & Qun X. 2007. Comparative studies on pollen submicroscopic morphology of some wild species and cultivars of bramble (Rubus L.). Acta Hort. Sin. 34(6): 1395–1404.Google Scholar
  32. Weber H.E. 1995. Rubus L., pp. 284–595. In: Conert H.J. et al. (eds), Gustav Hegi Illustrierte Flora von Mitteleuropa. 4(2A), Blackwell Wissenschafts-Verlag, Berlin.Google Scholar
  33. Wrońska-Pilarek D. & Jagodziński A.M. 2009. Pollen morphological variability of Polish native species of Rosa L. (Rosaceae). Dendrobiology 62: 71–82.Google Scholar
  34. Wrońska-Pilarek D. 1998. Pollen morphology of the Polish species of the genus Ribes L. Acta Soc. Bot. Pol. 67(3–4): 275–285.Google Scholar
  35. Wrońska-Pilarek D., Maliński T. & Lira J. 2006. Pollen morphology of Polish species of genus Rubus L. — Rubus gracilis J. Presl & C. Presl. Dendrobiology 56: 69–77.Google Scholar
  36. Zhou L.H., Wie Z.X. & Wu Z.Y. 1999. Pollen morphology of Rosoideae(Rosaceae) of China. Acta Bot. Yunnan. 21(4): 455–460.Google Scholar
  37. Zieliński J. 2001. Rubus L., pp. 458–480. In: Zając A. & Zając M. (eds), Distribution Atlas of vascular plants in Poland. Edited by Laboratory of Computer Chorology. Institute of Botany, Jagiellonian University, Kraków.Google Scholar
  38. Zieliński J. 2004. The genus Rubus (Rosaceae) in Poland. Pol. Bot. Stud., Kraków, 300 pp.Google Scholar
  39. Żukowski W. & Jackowiak B. (eds) 1995. Ginące i zagrożone rośliny naczyniowe Pomorza Zachodniego i Wielkopolski Prace Zakładu Taksonomii Roślin UAM 3. Bogucki Wydawnictwo Naukowe. Poznań, 141 pp.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© © Versita Warsaw and Springer-Verlag Wien 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dorota Wrońska-Pilarek
    • 1
  • Andrzej M. Jagodziński
    • 2
    • 3
  • Tomasz Maliński
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Forestry Natural FoundationsPoznan University of Life SciencesPoznanPoland
  2. 2.Institute of DendrologyPolish Academy of SciencesKornikPoland
  3. 3.Department of Forest ProtectionPoznan University of Life SciencesPoznanPoland

Personalised recommendations