Karyotype Alteration and Phylogeny. IV

Satô, Dyûhei

doi:10.1508/cytologia.9.203

Cited by 63 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The details of karyotype, comprising 10 long chromosomes bearing centromeres in terminal or subterminal regions and 50 short chromosomes with centromeres in median or submedian regions, also agree with some of the previous reports (Vij et al 1982, Satô 1938, Jayasree et al 2001. In these features and the presence of a secondary constriction on the long arms of a long pair, the karyotype of P. tuberosa matches closely with that of other members of Agavoideae such as Agave and Yucca species (Satô 1938, Vij et al 1982, Jyothilekshmi et al 2015, Palomino et al 2015.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 87%

“…Chromosome numbers 2n= 60 and n=30 recorded presently in Single have been reported earlier in singleflowered tuberose cultivars by Whitaker (1934), Satô (1938), Joshi and Pantulu (1940), Sharma and Ghosh (1956), Schiva and Lanteri (1984), and Jayasree et al (2001). The details of karyotype, comprising 10 long chromosomes bearing centromeres in terminal or subterminal regions and 50 short chromosomes with centromeres in median or submedian regions, also agree with some of the previous reports (Vij et al 1982, Satô 1938, Jayasree et al 2001.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 71%

“…A lesser grown single-flowered cultivar with variegated leaves is also found under cultivation in India. Most of the improved cultivars have been developed through selection and intraspecific hybridization and to a small extent through induced mutations and interspecific hybridization (Shen et al 1987, 1997, Srinivas et al 1995, Huang et al 2001, 2002, Banerji 2013 Most of the studies on cytology of P. tuberosa reported the chromosome number of single-flowered forms to be 2n= 60, while the double-flowered forms have been reported to have chromosome numbers of 2n=50, 54, 60 and 120 (Whitaker 1934, Satô 1938, Joshi and Pantulu 1940, Sharma and Ghosh 1956, Vij et al 1982, Schiva and Lanteri 1984, Jayasree et al 2001, Lin and Shen 2004. Self-incompatibility of various degrees has also been reported in some cultivars (Shen et al 1987, Datta 2017).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Cytological and Hybridization Studies in Three Cultivars of Tuberose (<i>Polianthes tuberosa</i> L.)

Karihaloo

2019

cytologia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Three cultivars of tuberose (Polianthes tuberosa L.), one having spikes with single type of flowers (Single), another with double type of flowers (Double) and the third with single flowers and variegated leaves (Variegated) had somatic chromosome number of 2n=60 and karyotypes comprising 10 long and 50 short chromosomes. The three cultivars, and hybrids of Single Double' and Variegated Single showed regular meiosis with the chromosomes paired into 30 bivalents at metaphase I (M I). These observations suggest that flower doubling and leaf variegation in tuberose have arisen due to gene mutations and do not necessarily involve changes in chromosome number or structure. Self-and cross-pollination studies revealed that Single was self-incompatible, whereas Variegated was self-compatible and Single Variegated and Single Double crosses were also compatible. However, fruit and seed set and percent seed germination varied among compatible combinations. Self-incompatibility in Single was gametophytic in nature with the pollen tubes getting inhibited in the style. Intervarietal hybrids showed useful variation in inflorescence and floral characters, some hybrids having larger spikes and more flowers/spike than either of the parents.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 87%

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 71%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Cytological and Hybridization Studies in Three Cultivars of Tuberose (<i>Polianthes tuberosa</i> L.)

Karihaloo

2019

cytologia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…(Sealy 1937) while Traub (1938) proposed the transfer to Amaryllis, in line with his belief that the type specimen of Amaryllis belladonna L. was an American plant (see Goldblatt 1984, for full details of this controversy). Satô (1938) published a chromosome number of 2n = 77 for the species, which would be consistent with x = 11 chromosomes as a basic chromosome number for Hippeastrum (Naranjo andAndrada 1975, Flory 1977). Almost fifty years later, Traub (1983) proposed the restoration of the species in Griffinia based on the work of Arroyo (1982), who reported 2n = 20 chromosomes for the species.…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 64%

Eithea lagopaivae, a new critically endangered species in the previously monotypic genus Eithea Ravenna (Amaryllidaceae)

Campos-Rocha¹,

Meerow²,

Lopes³

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Eithea lagopaivae Campos-Rocha & Dutilh, sp. nov. is described as the second species of the formerly monotypic genus Eithea. It is characterized by a one flowered inflorescence, completely hollow scape, white or lightly magenta-striated flower that is enclosed by spathe bracts fused for more than the lower fifth of its length. Comments on its range, habitat, phenology, as well as photographs and illustrations are provided. In addition, a distribution map and an identification key for the two species of the genus are presented and anatomical and ecological differences compared. Known by only two small populations exposed to several types of threats and without any guarantee of protection, E. lagopaivae is considered a Critically Endangered (CR) species. ResumoEithea lagopaivae Campos-Rocha & Dutilh, sp. nov. é descrita como a segunda espécie do gênero previamente monotípico Eithea. Caracteriza-se por apresentar a inflorescência uniflora, escapo totalmente oco, flor alva ou com leves estrias magenta, protegida por brácteas espatáceas fundidas na base por mais de um quinto do seu comprimento. Comentários sobre a sua área de ocorrência, hábitat, dados de fenologia, fotografias e ilustrações são fornecidos. Adicionalmente, um mapa de distribuição e uma chave de identifi- RESEARCH ARTICLE Launched to accelerate biodiversity research A peer-reviewed open-access journalAntonio Campos-Rocha et al. / PhytoKeys 85: 45-58 (2017) 46 cação para as duas espécies do gênero são apresentados e suas diferenças anatômicas e ecológicas comparadas. Conhecida de apenas duas pequenas populações sujeitas a diversos tipos de ameaça e sem qualquer garantia de proteção, E. lagopaivae é considerada uma espécie Criticamente em Perigo (CR) de extinção.

show abstract

“…The genus has base numbers of x = 6, 8 and 11 (Meerow 1995). Most Cyrtanthus species studied (Figures 1, 2) have a somatic chromosome number of 2n = 16 (Taylor 1925;Gouws 1949;Tjio & Levan 1950;Flory 1955;Ising 1962Ising , 1966Ising , 1970Wilsenach 1963;Bose 1965;Nandi 1973;Venkateswarlu & Lakshmi 1976;Laksmi 1980) or 2n = 32 (Ising 1966), but 2n = 14 and 22 were recorded by Bose (1965) and Sato (1938Sato ( , 1942, respectively for C. obliquus, and Mookerjea (1955) and Bose (1965) recorded 2n = 18 for C. sanguineus. Variations in karyo types have been described (Wilsenach 1963;Ising 1966).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%