Flower and spikelet morphology in sawgrass, Cladium jamaicense Crantz (Cyperaceae)

Why are the seed cones of conifers so diverse at pollination?

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Form and function relationships in plant reproductive structures have long fascinated biologists. Although the intricate associations between specific pollinators and reproductive morphology have been widely explored among animal-pollinated plants, the evolutionary processes underlying the diverse morphologies of wind-pollinated plants remain less well understood. Here we study how this diversity may have arisen by focusing on two conifer species in the pine family that have divergent reproductive cone morphologies at pollination.

METHODS

Standard histology methods, artificial wind pollination assays and phylogenetic analyses were used in this study.

KEY RESULTS

A detailed study of cone ontogeny in these species reveals that variation in the rate at which their cone scales mature means that pollination occurs at different stages in their development, and thus in association with different specific morphologies. Pollination experiments nevertheless indicate that both species effectively capture pollen.

CONCLUSIONS

In wind-pollinated plants, morphological diversity may result from simple variation in development among lineages rather than selective pressures for any major differences in function or performance. This work also illustrates the broader importance of developmental context in understanding plant form and function relationships; because plant reproductive structures perform many different functions over their lifetime, subtle differences in development may dramatically alter the specific morphologies that they use to meet these demands.

Floral ontogeny in ficinia and isolepis (cyperaceae), with focus on the nature and origin of the gynophore

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The generic delimitations of Ficinia and Isolepis, sister genera in the Cypereae, are blurred. Typical Ficinia flowers have a lobed gynophore, which envelops the base of the nutlet, whereas in Isolepis the character is considered to be absent. Some former species of Isolepis, lacking the gynophore, were recently included in Ficinia. The floral ontogeny of representative taxa in Ficinia and Isolepis were investigated with the aim of evaluating the origin and nature of the gynophore in the Cypereae.

METHODS

The spikelet and floral ontogeny in inflorescences collected in the field was investigated using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and light microscopy (LM).

KEY RESULTS

SEM images of Isolepis setacea and I. antarctica, Ficinia brevifolia, F. minutiflora, F. zeyheri and F. gracilis, and LM sections of F. radiata, show that the gynoecium in Ficinia is elevated above the flower receptacle by the development of a hypogynous stalk. From its apex, a (often three-)lobed cup is formed, which envelopes the basal part of the later nutlet. In developing flowers of I. antarctica, a rudimentary hypogynous stalk appears. In I. setacea, rudiments of a hypogynous stalk can be observed at maturity. In F. radiata and F. zeyheri, intralocular hairs are present in the micropylar zone. At the surface of developing gynoecia in flowers of F. gracilis, star-shaped cuticular structures appear which disappear again at maturity.

CONCLUSIONS

The overall floral ontogeny of all species studied occurs following a typical scirpoid pattern, though no perianth primordia are formed. The gynophore in Ficinia originates as a hypogynous stalk, from which the typical gynophore lobes develop. The gynophore is not homologous with the perianth.

Sympodial structure of spikelets in the tribe Schoeneae (Cyperaceae)

Spikelet morphology of 250 specimens of 47 species of Schoeneae was examined using light microscopy and scanning electron microscopy. We confirmed that spikelet structure in Schoeneae is cymose with a sympodial "rachilla." Monopodial spikelets, as described by most current literature, were not found in Schoeneae. Prophylls are not always present in sympodial spikelets and cannot be used to determine whether a spikelet is sympodial or monopodial. Spikelets of Schoeneae develop acropetally, and the uppermost glume may or may not produce a flower. The last feature may be variable within species and within individual plants, so presence or absence of this flower is not an indication of sympodial or monopodial spikelet structure in Schoeneae. Relative position of flower, glume, and axis is a reliable criterion to judge whether spikelets are sympodial or monopodial. In some species of Schoenus and in Ptilothrix, formation of the arch-shaped base of the fertile glume relates to the shape of the inclined nodes on which the glume grows. This study highlights the need to reinvestigate spikelet structure in other tribes of Cyperaceae.