Advertisement

Evolution of Sexuality in Amaranths

  • Saubhik Das
Chapter

Abstract

The genus Amaranthus is unique in matting behaviour ranging from self-compatibility to obligate out-crossing i.e., from monomorphic reproductive system to dimorphic reproductive system. It shows a wide range of variability in sexuality from gynomonoecy, monoecy to dioecy. Grain amaranths are exclusively monoecious, vegetable amaranths are predominantly monoecious with exception. A new gynomonoecious species Amaranthus parganensis Saubhik Das was identified from lower Gangetic plain of West Bengal that closely resemble A. tricolor. Dioecious species are confined to a small area in North America. Monoecy in amaranths may have evolved from hermaphrodite Chen-Am member. In case of vegetable amaranths genetic modification in female fertility of hermaphrodite population might have resulted in the formation of bisexual member with non functional gynoecium. Later male sterility gene played a role to develop female member. Subsequently, through inbreeding process gynomonoecious member might have originated. Monoecy is a derived condition originated from gynomonoecious condition through optimization of male and female reproduction through different selection processes. Origin of dioecy from monoecy may have evolved through disruptive selection on male and female reproductive allocation, followed by gender specialization ultimately leading to unisexual plants.

Keywords

Inbreeding Depression Female Fertility Sexual System Dioecious Species Disruptive Selection 
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.

References

  1. Bawa KS, Beach JH (1981) Evolution of sexual systems in flowering plants. Ann Mo Bot Gard 68:254–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bertin RI (1982) The evolution and maintenance of andromonoecy. Evol Theory 6:25–32Google Scholar
  3. Brenan JPM (1961) Amaranthus in Britain. Watsonia 4:261–280Google Scholar
  4. Case AI, Graham SW, Macfarlane TD (2008) A phylogenetic study of evolutionary transition in sexual system in Australasian Wurmbea (Colchicaceae). Int J Plant Sci 169:141–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chawla B, Bernatzky R, Liang W et al (1997) Brekdown of self-incompatibility in tetraploid Lycopersicon peruvianum: inheritance and expression of S-related protein. Theor Appl Genet 95:992–996CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cuenoud P, Savolainen V, Chatrou LW et al (2002) Molecular phylogenetics of Caryophyllales based on nuclear 18S rDNA and Plastid rbcL, atpB and matK DMA sequences. Am J Bot 89(1):132–144CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Das S (2015) Amaranthus parganensis (Amaranthaceae), a new species from West Bengal, India. Novon 23:406–410CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Das S, Iamonico D (2014) Amaranthus bengalense (Amaranthaceae0 a new species from India, with taxonomical notes on A. blitum aggregate. Phytotaxa 181(5):293–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. De Jong TJ, Klinkhamer PGL (1994) Plant size and reproductive success through female and male function. J Ecol 82:399–402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dorken ME, Friedman JE, Barrett SCH (2002) The evolution and maintenance of monoecy and dioecy in Sagittaria latifolia. Evolution 56:31–41CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Downey SR, Katz-Downey DS, Cho KJ (1997) Relationship in the Caryophyllales as suggested by phylogenetic analysis of partial chloroplast ORF 2280 homolog sequence. Am J Bot 84:253–273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Downie SR, Palmer JD (1994) A chloroplast DNA phylogeny of the Caryophyllales based on structural and inverted repeat restriction sites variation. Syst Bot 19:236–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Doyle JA (1998) Phylogeny of vascular plants. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 29:567–599CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Endress PK (2001) The flowers in extant basal angiosperms and inferences on ancestral flowers. Int J Plant Sci 162:1111–1140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gleiser G, Verdu M (2005) Repeated evolution of dioecy from androdioecy in Acer. New Phytol 165:633–640CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Grubben GJH, van Sloten DH (1981) Genetic resources of Amaranths. The International Board for Plant Genetic Resources Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome, p 45Google Scholar
  17. Hershkovitz MA (1989) Phylogenetic studies in Centrospermae: a brief appraisal. Taxon 38:602–608CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Johnson SD, Linder HP, Steiner KE (1998) Phylogeny and radiation of pollination system in Disa (Orchidaceae). Am J Bot 85:402–411CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Lloyd DG (1982) Selection of combined versus separate sexes in seed plants. Am Nat 120:571–585CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Manhart JR, Rettig JH (1994) Gene sequence data. In: Behnke H-D, Mabry TJ (eds) Caryophyllales: evolution and systematics. Springer, Berlin, pp 235–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Martin FW, Telek L (1979) Vegetables for the hot humid tropics. Part 6: Amaranth and Celosia. U.S. Department of Agriculture, New Orleans, LA, pp 1–21Google Scholar
  22. Miller JS, Venable DL (2000) Polyploid and the evolution of gender dimorphism. Science 289:2335–2338CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Mitchell CH, Diggle PK (2005) Evolution of unisexual flowers: morphological and functional convergence results from diverse developmental transitions. Am J Bot 92:1068–1076CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Mosyakin SL (2005) On the origin of dioecious amaranths (Amaranthus L., Amaranthaceae Juss.). Ukrainskyl botanichnyi zhurnal 62(1):3–9Google Scholar
  25. Renner SS, Ricklefs RE (1995) Dioecy and its correlates. Am J Bot 82:596–606CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Renner SS, Won H (2001) Repeated evolution of monoecy in Siparunaceae (Laurales). Syst Biol 50:700–712CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Richards AJ (1997) Plant breeding systems. Chapman and Hall, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Sauer JD (1957) Recent migration and evolution of the dioecious amaranths. Evolution 11:11–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Shmida A, Lev-Yadun S, Goubitz S et al (2000) Sexual allocation and gender segregation in Pinus halepensis, P. brutia and P. pinea. In: Ne’emen G, Trabaud L (eds) Ecology, biogeography and management of Pinus halepensis and P. brutia forest ecosystems in the Mediterranean Basin. Backhuys Publishers, Leiden, pp 1–14Google Scholar
  30. Wilson MF (1979) Sexual selection in planta. Am Nat 113:777–790CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Singapore 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Saubhik Das
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of BotanyTaki Government CollegeTakiIndia

Personalised recommendations