1972
DOI: 10.1007/bf00123635
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Cytological studies in some species of Momordica

Abstract: In the genus Momordiva thlee specms, M. charantia, M. balsamina and M. dioica, have been cytologically investigated. M. dioica has a more asymmetrical karyotype than the other two species.Meiosis in the three species is regular. The strictly monoecious M. charantia and M. balsamina show similarity in the range and frequency of bivalents and chiasmata, whereas M. dioica, a dioecious species, has fewer half chiasmata per chromosome. The evolutionary significance of perennial and annual habits along with allogamo… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

1991
1991
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
7
2
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 38 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 4 publications
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…and Roy, 1972) distributed in India, China, Nepal, Bangladesh, Myanmar, Pakistan and Srilanka. Immature green fruits are cooked as vegetable.…”
Section: Abbreviationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…and Roy, 1972) distributed in India, China, Nepal, Bangladesh, Myanmar, Pakistan and Srilanka. Immature green fruits are cooked as vegetable.…”
Section: Abbreviationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…); mohodu (Sotho); nkaka (Thonga); etc. The Balsam Pear flowers and fruits throughout the year, but mainly from October to May (Northern Hemisphere) [77]. Tendrils simple, leaves waxy, lower surface paler than upper, deeply palmately 5-7-lobed, to 12 cm long, margin toothed and stalked.…”
Section: The Plantmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(Steussy 1990). Momordica species are not easily amenable to cytological analysis as their chromosomes are very small and do not stain well (Bhaduri and Bose 1947) vis-a-vis the cytoplasm (Trivedi and Roy 1972). In literature, chromosome number of one species of Momordica is ascribed to that of another due to misidentification in taxonomical identity.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 97%