Effects of site conditions on sexual dimorphism and sex ratio in lowland populations of Aruncus sylvestris Kostel. (Rosaceae)

• Autorzy: Marciniuk J. , Marciniuk P. , Rymuza K.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Studies on sexual dimorphism in reference to vegetative features and on the sex ratio in different environmental conditions were carried out in lowland populations of dioecious species Aruncus sylvestris. It was shown that female individuals of Aruncus sylvestris produced higher flowering shoots, longer inflorescences, more leaves and longer and broader leaves than the male ones. All listed differences were statistically significant. In populations of Aruncus sylvestris growing in optimum ecological conditions (fertile and wet soil, half-light) the sex ratio M/F is close to 1:1. Changes of ecological conditions along the gradient of fertility, habitat moisture (estimated by the types of phytocoenoses) and intensity of solar radiation caused marked drift of sex structure towards the male domination. Light intensity was the crucial factor for the sex ratio in studied populations. Populations growing in half-light showed sex ratio M/F [is approximately equal to] 1:1 irrespective of habitat. Those growing in shade and in full light showed significant shift to male dominance. The largest deviation from 1:1 sex ratio (M/F [is approximately equal to] 1.0:0.2) was observed in extremely unfavorable habitat conditions (full sun irradiance, dry soil, strong competition from Elymus repens (L.) Gould). Obtained results demonstrated that female individuals of Aruncus sylvestris had markedly higher habitat requirements compared with the male ones.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

Aruncus sylvestris; lowland populations; sex dimorphism; sex ratio

PL

Aruncus sylvestris; dymorfizm płciowy; nizina; Parzydło leśne; populacja; proporcja płci

• Wydawca: Museum and Institute of Zoology, Polish Academy of Sciences
• Czasopismo: Polish Journal of Ecology
• Rocznik: 2010
• Tom: Vol. 58, nr 2
• Strony: 249--257
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 48 poz.,Rys., tab.,

Twórcy

autor

Marciniuk J.

autor

Marciniuk P.

autor

Rymuza K.

• Department of Botany, University of Podlasie, Prusa 12, PL-08-110 Siedlce, Poland,

Bibliografia

• 1. Alonso C., Herrera C.M. 2001 – Neither vegetative nor reproductive advantages account for high frequency of male-steriles in southern Spanish gynodioecious Daphne laureola (Thymelaeaceae) – Am. J. Bot. 88: 1016–1024.
• 2. Alström-Rapaport C., Lascoux M., Gullberg U. 1997 – Sex determination and sex ratio in the dioecious shrub Salix viminalis L. - Theor. Appl. Genet. 94: 493–497.
• 3. Ashman T-L. 2005 – The Limits on Sexual Dimorphism in Vegetative Traits in a Gynodioecious Plant – Am. Nat. Suppl. 166: 5–16.
• 4. Bierzychudek P., Eckhart V. 1988 – Spatial segregation of the sexes of dioecious plants – Am. Nat. 132: 34–43.
• 5. Braun-Blanquet J. 1964 – Pflanzensoziologie, Grundzüge der Vegetationskunde. 3 – Aufl. Springer, Wien-New York, 865 pp.
• 6. Charlesworth D. 1993 – Save the males – Curr. Biol. 3: 155–157.
• 7. Charlesworth D. 2002 – Plant sex determination and sex chromosomes – Heredity, 88: 94–101.
• 8. Cipollini M.L., Whigham D.F. 1994 – Sexual dimorphism and cost of reproduction in the dioecious shrub Lindera benzoin (Lauraceae) - Am. J. Bot. 81: 65–75.
• 9. Cronquist A. 1988 – The Evolution and Classification of Flowering Plants – Bronx, NY: New York Botanical Gardens, 555 pp.
• 10. Cvetkowić D., Jovanović V. 2007 – Altitudinal variation of the sex ratio and segregation by gender in the dioecious plant Mercurialis perennis L. (Euphorbiaceae) – Serbia. Arch. Biol. Sci 59: 193–198.
• 11. Delannay X., Gouyonz P.H., Valdeyronz G. 1981 – Mathematical study of the evolution of gynodioecy with cytoplasmic inheritance under the effect of a nuclear restorer gene – Genetics, 99: 169–l81.
• 12. Dellaporta S.L., Calderon-Urrea A. 1993 - Sex Determination in Flowering Plants – The Plant Cell, 5: 1241–1251.
• 13. Dzhaparidze L.I. 1967 – Sex in plants. I – Israel Program for Scientific Translations, Jerusalem, 197 pp.
• 14. Eckhart V.M. 1999 – Sexual dimorphism in flowers and inflorescences (In: Gender and sexual dimorphism in flowering plants, Eds: M.A. Geber, T.E. Dawson, L.F. Delph) – Springer, Berlin: 123–148.
• 15. Evans R.C., Dickinson T.A. 1999 – Floral ontogeny and morphology in subfamily Spiraeoideae Endl. (Rosaceae) – Int. J. Plant Sci. 160: 981–1012.
• 16. Faliński J.B. 1980 – Changes in the sex- and age-ratio in populations of pioneer dioecious woody species (Juniperus, Populus, Salix) in connection with the course of vegetation succesion in abandoned farmlands – Ekol. Pol. 28: 327–365.
• 17. Fisher R.A. 1930 – The genetical theory of natural selection – Oxford University Press, Oxford, 272 pp.
• 18. Freeman D.C., Harper K.T., Charnov E.L. 1980 – Sex change in plants: old and new observations, and new hypotheses – Oecologia, 47: 222–232.
• 19. Garcia M., Antor R. 1995 – Sex ratio and sexual dimorphism in the dioecious Borderea pyrenaica (Dioscoreaceae) – Oecologia, 101: 59–67.
• 20. Gorelick R. 2005 – Theory for why dioecious plants have equal length sex chromosomes – Am. J. Bot. 92: 979–984.
• 21. Irish E.E., Timothy Nelson T. 1989 – Sex Determination in Monoecious and Dioecious Plants – The Plant Cell, 1: 737–744.
• 22. Kohn J.R. 1989 – Sex ratio, seed production, biomass allocation, and the cost of male function in Cucurbita foetidissima HBK (Cucurbitaceae) - Evolution, 43: 1424–1434.
• 23. Korpelainen H. 1992 – Patterns of resource allocation in male and female plants of Rumex acetosa and Rumex acetosella – Oecologia, 89: 133–139.
• 24. Leigh A., Nicotra A.B. 2003 – Sexual dimorphism in reproductive allocation and water use efficiency in Maireana pyramidata (Chenopodiaceae), a dioecious, semi-arid shrub – Aust. J. Bot. 51: 509–514.
• 25. Lovett Doust J., O’Brien G., Lovett Doust L. 1987 – Effect of density on secondary sex characteristics and sex ratio in Silene alba (Caryophyllaceae) – Am. J. Bot. 74: 40–46.
• 26. Machon N., Le Boulc’h V.D., Rameau C. 1995 – Quantitative analysis of sexual dimorphism in Asparagus – Can. J. Bot. 73: 1780–1786.
• 27. Matuszkiewicz W. 2001 – Przewodnik do oznaczania zbiorowisk roślinnych Polski [Guidebook to plant communities of Poland] - PWN, Warszawa, 537 pp. (in Polish).
• 28. Meagher T.R. 1981 – Population biology of Chamaelirium luteum, a dioecious lily. II. Mechanisms governing sex ratios – Evolution, 35: 557–567.
• 29. Mirek Z., Piękoś-Mirkowa H., Zając A., Zając M. 2002 – Flowering plants and pteridophytes of Poland. A checklist (In: Biodiversity of Poland, Ed: Z. Mirek) – W. Szafer Institute of Botany, Polish Academy of Sciences, Kraków, pp. 1–442.
• 30. Mitchell C.H., Diggle P.K. 2005 – The evolution of unisexual flowers: morphological and functional convergence results from diverse developmental transitions – Am. J. Bot. 92: 1068–1076.
• 31. Mosiołek M., Pasierbek P., Malarz J., Moś M., Joachimiak A. 2005 – Rumex acetosa Y chromosomes: constitutive or facultative heterochromatin? – Folia Histochem. Cyto. 43: 161–167.
• 32. Nanami S., Kawaguchi H., Yamakura T. 2004 – Sex Change Towards Female in Dying Acer rufinerve Trees – Ann. Bot.-London 93: 733–740.
• 33. Negrutiu I., Vyskot B., Barbacar N., Georgiev S, Moneger F. 2001 – Dioecious Plants. A Key to the Early Events of Sex Chromosome Evolution – Plant Physiol. 127: 1418–1424.
• 34. Nicolas M., Marais G., Hykelova V., Janousek B., Laporte V., Vyskot B., Mouchiroud D., Negrutiu I., Charlesworth D., Monéger F. 2004 – A gradual process of recombination restriction in the evolutionary history of the sex chromosomes in dioecious plants – PLoS Biol. 3: e4.
• 35. Ortiz P.L., Arista M., Talavera S. 2002 – Sex ratio and reproductive effort in the dioecious Juniperus communis subsp. alpina (Suter) Čelak. (Cupressaceae) along an altitudinal gradient – Annals of Botany, 89: 205–211.
• 36. Putwain P.D., Harper J.L. 1972 – Studies in the dynamics of plant populations. V. Mechanisms governing the sex ratio in Rumex acetosa and R. aeetosella – J. Ecol. 60: 113–129.
• 37. Ramsey M., Vaughton G. 2001 – Sex expression and sexual dimorphism in subdioecious Wurmbea dioica (Colchicaceae) – Int. J. Plant Sci. 162: 589–597.
• 38. Ramsey M., Vaughton G. 2002 – Maintenance of gynodioecy in Wurmbea biglandulosa (Colchicaceae): gender differences in seed production and progeny success – Plant Systematics and Evolution, 232:189–200.
• 39. Rottenberg A. 2000 – A field survey of dioecious plants in Israel: sex ratio in seven rare species – Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society, 134: 439–442.
• 40. Sakai A., Sasa A., Sakai S. 2006 – Do sexual dimorphisms in reproductive allocation and new shoot biomass increase with an increase of altitude? A case of the shrub willow Salix reinii (Salicaceae) – Am. J. Bot. 93: 988–992.
• 41. Taylor D.R. 1994 – The Genetic Basis of Sex Ratio in Silene alba (= S. latifolia) – Genetics, 136: 641–651.
• 42. Waser N.M. 1984 – Sex ratio variations in populations of a dioecious desert perennial, Simmondsia chinensis – Oikos, 42: 343–348.
• 43. Westergaard M. 1958 – The mechanism of sex determination in dioecious flowering plants – Advances in Genet. 9: 217–281.
• 44. Wolf D.E., Satkoski J.A., White K., Rieseberg L.H. 2001 – Sex determination in the androdioecious plant Datisca glomerata and its dioecious sister species D. cannabina – Genetics, 159: 1243–1257.
• 45. Zając A., Zając M. 2001 – Distribution Atlas of Vascular Plants in Poland – Laboratory of Computer Chorology, Institute of Botany, Jagiellonian University, Kraków, 716 pp.
• 46. Zarzycki K., Rychlewski J. 1972 – Sex ratios in Polish natural populations and in seedling samples of Rumex acetosa L. and R. thyrsiflorus Fing. – Acta Biol. Cracov. Series Botanica, 15: 135–151.
• 47. Zarzycki K., Trzcińska-Tacik H., Różański W., Szeląg Z., Wołek J., Korzeniak U. 2002 – Ecological indicator values of vascular plants of Poland – W. Szafer Institute of Botany, Polish Academy of Sciences, Kraków, 183 pp. (in Polish and English).
• 48. Żuk J. 1970 – Structure and Function of Sex Chromosomes in Rumex thyrsiflorus – Acta Soc. Bot. Pol. 39: 539–564.