1954
DOI: 10.1016/s0065-2660(08)60132-7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Cytoplasmic Inheritance in Epilobium and Its Theoretical Significance

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
28
0

Year Published

1962
1962
2013
2013

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 110 publications
(30 citation statements)
references
References 55 publications
2
28
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The best known case of such an interaction between the cytoplasm of one species and the nuclear genes of another is that met with in the genus Epilobium and worked out in great detail by MICHAELIS (1954). Reciprocal differences in plastid in Oenothera have also been shown by RENNER (1929; vide MICHAELIS 1954) to be dependent on cytoplasmic factors. Similar cytoplasmic differences have been shown to occur between different species of Solanum (see Section 3C).…”
supporting
confidence: 58%
“…The best known case of such an interaction between the cytoplasm of one species and the nuclear genes of another is that met with in the genus Epilobium and worked out in great detail by MICHAELIS (1954). Reciprocal differences in plastid in Oenothera have also been shown by RENNER (1929; vide MICHAELIS 1954) to be dependent on cytoplasmic factors. Similar cytoplasmic differences have been shown to occur between different species of Solanum (see Section 3C).…”
supporting
confidence: 58%
“…However, such relationships have perhaps never been so systematically investigated as by Michaelis (1954), who reported on the results of a large series of reciprocal crosses and backcrosses between some 10 species of annual Epilobium. Without a detailed embryological investigation, it is not always easy to distinguish this type of seed failure from seed incompatibility.…”
Section: Seed Sterility (F 1 Embryo Inviability)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, the pattern of male sterility observed does not readily fit with the expectations of simple models of epistatic breakdown in hybrids (Turelli and Orr 2000). Because the stunted appearance of sterile anthers resembles the anther reductions in females of gynodioecious members of the Caryophyllaceae (e.g., Desfeux et al 1996), one attractive explanation is a mismatch between cytoplasmic male sterility (CMS) and nuclear restorer genotypes in hybrids (e.g., Michaelis 1954;Levy 1991). However, because the reciprocal classes of F 1 hybrids were equally affected, this mechanism would require that the selfer and outcrosser populations have separate and incompatible CMS-restorer systems.…”
Section: The Evolution Of Selfing and The Development Of Postmating Rmentioning
confidence: 99%