4.4 Article

Characterization of unisexual flower development in the endangered mahogany tree Swietenia macrophylla King.: (Meliaceae)

Journal

BOTANICAL JOURNAL OF THE LINNEAN SOCIETY
Volume 156, Issue 4, Pages 529-535

Publisher

BLACKWELL PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.1111/j.1095-8339.2007.00758.x

Keywords

diclinous flowers; inflorescence development; reproduction; tropical endangered tree

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The selection of candidate plus trees of desirable phenotypes from tropical forest trees and the rapid devastation of the natural environments in which these trees are found have created the need for a more detailed knowledge of the floral and reproductive biology of tropical tree species. In this article, the organogenic processes related to unisexual flower development in tropical mahogany, Swietenia macrophylla, are described. Mahogany inflorescences at different developmental stages were evaluated using scanning electron microscopy or optical microscopy of histological sections. The unisexual flowers of S. macrophylla are usually formed in a thyrse, in which the positions of the female and male flowers are not random. Differences between male and female flowers arise late during development. Both female and male flowers can only be structurally distinguished after stage 9, where ovule primordia development is arrested in male flowers and microspore development is aborted in female flower anthers. After this stage, male and female flowers can be distinguished by the naked eye as a result of differences in the dimensions of the gynoecium. The floral characteristics of S. macrophylla (distribution of male and female flowers within the inflorescence, and the relative number of male to female flowers) have practical implications for conservation strategies of this endangered species. (c) 2008 The Linnean Society of London, Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society, 2008, 156, 529-535.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available