4.5 Article

SIZE-DEPENDENT POLLEN:OVULE RATIOS AND THE ALLOMETRY OF FLORAL SEX ALLOCATION IN CLARKIA (ONAGRACEAE) TAXA WITH CONTRASTING MATING SYSTEMS

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF BOTANY
Volume 96, Issue 5, Pages 968-978

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.3732/ajb.0800039

Keywords

Clarkia; gametophyte production; mating system; Onagraceae; pollen to ovule ratio; size-dependent sex allocation

Categories

Funding

  1. National Science Foundation [DEB 9816256, 9815300]
  2. Gettysburg College
  3. Direct For Biological Sciences [9815300] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  4. Division Of Environmental Biology [9815300] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Multiple field populations of two pairs of diploid sister taxa with contrasting mating systems in the genus Clarkia (Onagraceae) were surveyed to test predictions concerning the effects of resource status, estimated as plant size, and ovule production and on the pollen:ovule (P:O) ratio of flowers. Most theoretical models of size-dependent sex allocation predict that, in outcrossing populations, larger plants should allocate more resources to female function. Lower P:O ratios in larger plants compared to smaller plants have been interpreted as supporting this prediction. In contrast, we predicted that P:O ratio should not vary with plant size in predominantly selling plants, in which each flower contributes to reproductive success equally through male and female function. We found that, in all four taxa, both ovule and pollen production per flower usually increased significantly with plant size and that the shape of this relationship was decelerating. However, ovule production either decelerated more rapidly than or at the same rate as pollen production with plant size. Consequently, the P:O ratio increased or had no relationship with plant size. This relationship was population-specific (not taxon-specific) and independent of the mating system. Possible explanations for the increasing maleness with plant size are discussed.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available