| Literature DB >> 24289097 |
Honglian Ai1, Wei Zhou, Kun Xu, Hong Wang, Dezhu Li.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Plants may adapt to alpine habitats by specialization in the reproductive strategy and functional aspects of their flowers and pollination systems. Alpine habitats reduce the opportunities for cross-pollination in a relatively high proportion of alpine plant species, and self-pollination may be favored in these adverse conditions. Here, we investigated the mating system and pollination of Incarvillea mairei, a perennial Himalayan herb typically found at altitudes between 3000 and 4500 m.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 24289097 PMCID: PMC4219382 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2229-13-195
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Plant Biol ISSN: 1471-2229 Impact factor: 4.215
Figure 1Flower structures of and pollinator behavior. (A) Rocky meadow habitat of population GML. (B) Mature flower. (C)The large, bilobed sensitive stigma and four anthers. (D) Longitudinal section of flower. (E) Anther appendages (attached oppositely to each lobe). (F) Opened stigma. (G) Closed Stigma. (H) Halictid bee touching the stigma. (I) Halictid bee is pressing the anther-thorns (arrow indicating released pollen). (J) Halictid bee exiting flower. (K) After bee has exited, the stigma remained closed. a.i: inner anther; a.o: outer anther; t.o: outer anther-thorn; t.i: inner anther-thorn; s: slit in anther-lobe; p: pad.
Effect of pollination treatment (natural pollination, hand cross-pollination, hand self-pollination and supplemented pollination) and year (2007 and 2008) on levels of fruit set and seed set in
| Treatment | 0.007 | 572.70** | 12.539 | 751.5** | 0.060 | 0.591 |
| Year | 0.456 | 91.95** | 0.103 | 185.07** | 0.004 | 0.11 |
Note: Asterisks indicate MANOVA or univariate ANOVAs that are statistically significant: **P < 0.001.
Figure 2Comparison of fruit set (A) and seed set (B) among pollination treatments in the population HLG. NP, natural pollination; HC, hand cross-pollination; HS, hand self-pollination; SP, supplemented pollination; B, bagged, automatic self-pollination; A, apomixis. Bars with different letters differ statistically at P < 0.05.
Effect of pollination treatment (supplemented hand pollination or control) and plot type (low, medium and high) on levels of fruit set and seed set in
| | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Treatment | 0.012 | 4.554** | 8.893 | 918.6** | 0.107 | 3.391 |
| Population | 0.428 | 30.438 | 0.014 | 7.207 | 0.157 | 2.486 |
Note: Asterisks indicate MANOVA or univariate ANOVAs that are statistically significant: **P < 0.001.
Figure 3Comparison of fruit (A) and seed set (B) between natural pollination and supplemental pollination treatments. Bars with different letters differ statistically at P < 0.05. Black bars: natural pollination; grey bars: supplemental pollination.
Genetic diversity of seven microsatellite loci in adult plants from three populations of
| IM6 | 4 | 0.521 | 0.767 | 6 | 0.642 | 0.733 | 2 | 0.508 | 0.967* |
| IM7 | 7 | 0.833 | 0.800 | 8 | 0.797 | 0.800 | 5 | 0.623 | 0.267* |
| IM26 | 6 | 0.674 | 0.400* | 6 | 0.682 | 0.533 | 3 | 0.666 | 0.567* |
| IM48 | 7 | 0.781 | 0.833 | 8 | 0.776 | 0.633 | 8 | 0.820 | 0.767 |
| IM73 | 10 | 0.881 | 0.933 | 6 | 0.770 | 0.733 | 4 | 0.242 | 0.267 |
| IM75 | 4 | 0.644 | 0.600 | 4 | 0.691 | 0.333* | 2 | 0.488 | 0.733* |
| IM78 | 5 | 0.753 | 0.633 | 8 | 0.820 | 0.667 | 7 | 0.847 | 0.833 |
| Average | 6.143 | 0.727 | 0.709 | 6.571 | 0.740 | 0.633 | 4.429 | 0.599 | 0.629 |
Note: A, number of allele per locus; HE, expected heterozygosity; HO, observed heterozygosity; *statistically significant deviation from Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium at P < 0.01.
Mating system parameters for estimated in each mother individual, population and over all three study sites
| GHB | 150 | 0.970 ±0.085 | 0.829 ± 0.058 | 0.141 ± 0.073 |
| HLG | 150 | 0.988 ± 0.072 | 0.808 ± 0.071 | 0.180 ± 0.062 |
| GML | 150 | 0.978 ± 0.065 | 0.920 ± 0.046 | 0.058 ± 0.054 |
The estimates of correlated paternity (mean ± SE) and the effective number of pollen donors (the reciprocal of correlated paternity) extracted from Ritland mixed mating model and TWOGENER analysis
| GHB | 0.491 ±0.105 | 2.036 | 0.470 ± 0.019 | 2.127 |
| HLG | 0.999 ± 0.164 | 1.001 | 0.602 ± 0.026 | 1.661 |
| GML | 0.488 ± 0.086 | 2.049 | 0.432 ± 0.051 | 2.314 |