Advertisement

Evolutionary Law for Ornamental Crabapple Pollen Traits

  • Wangxiang Zhang
  • Junjun Fan
  • Yinfeng Xie
  • Ye Peng
  • Ting Zhou
  • Mingming Zhao
Chapter

Abstract

Nine phenotypic traits were assessed by field emission electron microscopy to explore pollen variation in various Malus species and cultivars. Phylogenetic reconstruction showed that the resulting molecular tree coincided with classical taxonomy. No distinct pollen evolutionary pattern was observed in Malus spp., except for exine ornamentation, which showed the evolutionary direction of large to small ridges. Based on the frequency distribution function, all traits except for P/E0 (polar axis/equator diameter) exhibited changes from species to cultivars. The direction of alteration was as follows: big to small pollens; elliptic to rectangular morphologies; large and compact to small and sparse ridges, and high to low perforation densities. The degree of alteration was as follows: pollen size and shape > exine ornamentation, and equatorial direction > polar direction. Boxplot analysis indicated that only three traits—E1/2/E0 (E1/2, equatorial diameter at 1/4 of P), ridge interval, and perforation density—exhibited significant differences, and the direction of alteration was the same as that shown by the frequency distribution function. Our findings suggest that pollen phenotypes are not sufficient in revealing the evolutionary pattern of Malus spp. However, the frequency distribution function was more precise in revealing both the direction and degree of alteration among populations.

References

  1. 1.
    Li YN (2001) Researches of germplasm resources of Malus Mill [M]. China Agriculture Press, Beijing, pp 181–183, 315–335Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rehder A (1940) Manual of cultivated trees and shrubs [M]. Macmillam Co, New York, pp 389–399Google Scholar
  3. 6.
    Katifori E, Alben S, Cerda E et al (2010) Foldable structures and the natural design of pollen grains [J]. Proc Natl Acad Sci 107(17):7635–7639CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 7.
    Qaiser M, Perveen A, Sarwar GR (2015) Pollen morphology of the family crassulaceae from Pakistan and kashmir and its taxonomic implications [J]. Pak J Bot 47(4):1481–1493Google Scholar
  5. 8.
    Sarwar AKMG, Takahashi H (2012) Pollen morphology of Kalmia L.(Phyllodoceae, Ericaceae) and its taxonomic significance [J]. Bangladesh J Plant Taxonomy 19(2):123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 10.
    Sarwar AKMG, Hoshino Y, Araki H (2010) Pollen morphology and infrageneric classification of Alstroemeria L.(Alstroemeriaceae) [J]. Grana 49(4):227–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 11.
    Reznick DN, Ricklefs RE (2009) Darwin’s bridge between microevolution and macroevolution [J]. Nature 457(7231):837–842CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 12.
    Member FJA, Ontologist RA (2009) Chapter ten. Microevolution and macroevolution are not governed by the same processes [M]. In: Contemporary debates in philosophy of biology. Wiley-Blackwell, West Sussex, pp 180–193Google Scholar
  9. 13.
    Dietrich MR (2009) Microevolution and macroevolution are governed by the same processes [M]. In: Contemporary debates in philosophy of biology. Wiley-Blackwell, West Sussex, pp 180–193Google Scholar
  10. 14.
    Xu BS (1991) An overview of macroevolution on the viewpoint of microevolution [J]. Acta Bot Yunnanica 13(1):101–112Google Scholar
  11. 15.
    Akhila H, Beevy SS (2015) Palynological characterization of species of Sesamum (Pedaliaceae) from Kerala: a systematic approach [J]. Plant Syst Evol 301(9):2179–2188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 16.
    Chen WW, He XJ, Zhang XM et al (2007) Pollen morphology of the genus angelica from Southwest China and its systematic evolution analysis [J]. Acta Botan Boreali-Occiden Sin 27(7):1364–1372Google Scholar
  13. 17.
    Welsh M, Stefanović S, Costea M (2010) Pollen evolution and its taxonomic significance in Cuscuta, (dodders, Convolvulaceae) [J]. Plant Syst Evol 285(1):83–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 18.
    Xie L, Li LQ (2012) Variation of pollen morphology, and its implications in the phylogeny of Clematis, (Ranunculaceae) [J]. Plant Syst Evol 298(8):1437–1453CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 19.
    Yang XH (l986) Observation and study on Malus pollen [J]. J Southwest Agric Univ 2:122–129Google Scholar
  16. 20.
    Higgins D, Thompson J, Gibson T et al (1994) CLUSTAL W: improving the sensitivity of progressive multiple sequence alignment through sequence weighting, position-specific gap penalties and weight matrix choice [J]. Nucleic Acids Res 22:4673–4680CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 21.
    Tamura K, Peterson D, Peterson N et al (2011) MEGA5: molecular evolutionary genetics analysis using maximum likelihood, evolutionary distance, and maximum parsimony methods [J]. Mol Biol Evol 28(10):2731CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Science Press & Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Wangxiang Zhang
    • 1
  • Junjun Fan
    • 1
  • Yinfeng Xie
    • 1
  • Ye Peng
    • 1
  • Ting Zhou
    • 1
  • Mingming Zhao
    • 1
  1. 1.College of ForestryNanjing Forestry UniversityNanjingChina

Personalised recommendations