Genetic Factors to be Considered in Maintaining Living Plant Collections

  • Karl Esser
Part of the NATO Conference Series book series (NATOCS, volume 1)


At a time when public opinion has become focussed on environmental problems and the protection of wild life, the maintenance of living plant collections has also assumed considerable importance. Maintenance does not only involve economic and technical problems but also problems of basic research mainly relating to genetics. This brings up the question: That do we want to maintain and what can we maintain? There are two alternative possibilities to consider:
  1. 1.

    To keep the populations concerned as far as possible under the same conditions as they grow in their natural environment so as to allow them to follow the same lines of evolution as in nature; this may be called conservation.

  2. 2.

    To keep the populations at the stage of evolution at which they were taken from nature; this may be called preservation.



Pollen Tube Sexual Reproduction Breeding System Plant Collection Sterility Gene 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. ARASU, N.T. (1968). Self-incompatibility in angiosperms: a review. Genetica 39: 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. EHRLICH, P.R. and RAVEN, P.H. (1969). Differentiation of populations. Science 165: 1228–1231.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. ESSER, K. (1971). Breeding systems in fungi and their significance for genetic recombination. Molecular and General Genetics 110: 86–100.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. ESSER, K. and BLAICH, R. (1973). Heterogenic incompatibility in plants and animals. Advances in Genetics 17: 107–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. HESLOP-HARRISON, J. (1972). Sexuality of angiosperms. In STEWARD, F.C. (ed.) Plant physiology: a treatise. Vol. VIC: Physiology of development: from seeds to sexuality: 133–289. Academic Press New York and London.Google Scholar
  6. LINSKENS, H.F. and KROH, M. (1967). Inkompatibilität der Phanerogamen. In RUHLAND, W. (ed.) Handbuch der Pflanzenphysiologie Vol. XVIII: 506–530. Springer Berlin, Heidelberg and New York.Google Scholar
  7. TOWNSEND, C.E. (1971). Advances in the study of incompatibility. In HESLOP-HARRISON, J. (ed.) Pollen: development and physiology: 281–309. Butterworth, London.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1976

Authors and Affiliations

  • Karl Esser
    • 1
  1. 1.Ruhr-UniversityBochumFederal German Republic

Personalised recommendations