The Beginnings of Plant Hybridization

Zirkle, Conway

doi:10.9783/9781512809084

Cited by 124 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The first written reference to spontaneous plant hybridization, found in a letter written by Cotton Mather in 1716, describes naturally occurring crosses between Indian and yellow corn and between gourds and squash that were planted together (Zirkle, 1935). However, it appears that the first intentional artificial hybrid was generated by Thomas Fairchild in a cross between carnation (Dianthus caryophyllus) and sweet William (Dianthus barbatus).…”

Section:   mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The modern history of plant hybridization was initiated by Camerarius, who in 1694 speculated that it might be possible to fertilize a female plant of one species with pollen from a male plant of another species (Zirkle, 1935). The first written reference to spontaneous plant hybridization, found in a letter written by Cotton Mather in 1716, describes naturally occurring crosses between Indian and yellow corn and between gourds and squash that were planted together (Zirkle, 1935).…”

Section:   mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Plant hybridization

1998

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary 599 I. Introduction 599 II. Concepts and terminology 600 III. Historical background 600 IV. Studies of experimental hybrids 601 1. Isolating mechanisms 601 2. Prezygotic barriers 602 (a) Gametic barriers to hybridization 602 3. Postzygotic barriers 603 (a) Chromosomal rearrangements 604 (b) Genic sterility or inviability 604 4. Hybrid vigour 605 5. Introgression 606 6. Hybrid speciation 607 V. Experimental manipulations of natural hybrid populations 609 1. Hybrid‐zone formation 610 2. Pollinator‐mediated selection 610 3. Habitat selection 612 VI. The biology of different classes of hybrids 612 1. Character expression 613 (a) Morphological characters 613 (b) Chemical characters 613 (c) Molecular characters 613 2. The fitness of different classes of hybrids 614 (a) The importance of variance 614 (b) Estimating hybrid fitness 615 3. Interactions with parasites and herbivores 616 4. Patterns of mating 617 (a) Outcrossing rate 617 (b) Hybridization frequency 618 (c) Mate choice 618 VII. Conclusions and future research 619 Acknowledgements 620 References 620 Most studies of plant hybridization are concerned with documenting its occurrence in different plant groups. Although these descriptive, historical studies are important, the majority of recent advances in our understanding of the process of hybridization are derived from a growing body of experimental microevolutionary studies. Analyses of artificially synthesized hybrids in the laboratory or glasshouse have demonstrated the importance of gametic selection as a prezygotic isolating barrier; the complex genetic basis of hybrid sterility, inviability and breakdown; and the critical role of fertility selection in hybrid speciation. Experimental manipulations of natural hybrid zones have provided critical information that cannot be obtained in the glasshouse, such as the evolutionary conditions under which hybrid zones are formed and the effects of habitat and pollinator‐mediated selection on hybrid‐zone structure and dynamics. Experimental studies also have contributed to a better understanding of the biology of different classes of hybrids. Analyses of morphological character expression, for example, have revealed transgressive segregation in the majority of later‐generation hybrids. Other studies have documented a high degree of variability in fitness among different hybrid genotypes and the rapid response of such fitness to selection – evidence that hybridization need not be an evolutionary dead end. However, a full accounting of the role of hybridization in adaptive evolution and speciation will probably require the integration of experimental and historical approaches.

show abstract

Section:   mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section:   mentioning

confidence: 99%

Plant hybridization

1998

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Beltzer and Ownbey (1971) state that artificial crosses between T. pratensis and T. porrifolius had been made by Linnaeus, which, they pointed out, was one of the first hybridizations carried out for scientific purposes. [For more details on this topic, see Roberts (1929) and Zirkle (1935 Detailed studies of these entities showed that hybridization had occurred (and likely continues to occur) in areas of sympatry and that two of the hybrid forms had become stabilized. The amphidiploids were named T. mints and T. miscellus (Ownbey, 1950).…”

Section: Tragopogonmentioning

confidence: 99%

Flavonoids of the Sunflower Family (Asteraceae)

Bohm

Stuessy

2001

119

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically those of translation, reprinting, re-use of illustrations, broadcasting, reproduction by photocopying machines or similar means, and storage in data banks. This book is dedicated to:Arthur Cronquist Outstanding plant systematist and major contributor to understanding taxonomic relationships within Asteraceae and Ralph E. Alston (1925Alston ( -1967) Visionary natural products chemist and geneticist who pioneered the use of chemical data in studies of plant systematics and evolution PrefaceCertainly many of the readers of this book will remember the early developments of chemosystematics in the late 1950s. We ourselves remember the excitement of these new data bearing on plant interrelationships. The hopes were high, the techniques were rapidly evolving, the quantities of data were large, and young workers were eagerly enthusiastic. Some even went so far as to predict that chemical data would soon replace morphological information as the basis for plant classification. These overly zealous predictions did not materialize, of course, as the history of plant systematics has amply shown during the past two centuries. If there is any distinct characteristic of systematics it is synthesis, as Lincoln Constance (1964) called it, the "unending synthesis." New tools generate new data and provide insights on additional dimensions of plant relationships. This will never change-we will continue to discover new tools and new data in the years ahead, and they will continue to be incorporated into the predictive general reference system of classification.The earlier efforts in chemosystematics focused on secondary plant products: alkaloids, betacyanins, carbohydrates, cyanogenic glycosides, glucosinolates, lipids, terpenoids, and especialiy flavonoids. The latter were particularly well suited for chemosystematic investigation for several reasons: ease of isolation and characterization, small amounts of plant material needed for analysis, stability of compounds especially through routine preparation of herbarium specimens, and low cost to obtain useful information. As a result of these considerable advantages, literally thousands of studies on use of flavonoids in plant systematics have been published. Although now with the present zest for macromolecular data from DNA restriction sites and sequences, there are fewer workers and laboratories dedicated to flavonoid chemosystematic studies; twenty years ago they were the new currency of exciting data in plant systematics.Because of many workers historically interested in the sunflower family, Asteraceae (or Compositae), in part due to its large size (approximately 23,000 species;Bremer, 1994), and because hundreds of flavonoid compounds were discovered in this family, many chemosystematic investigations have been completed on various taxa. Many studies came from the laboratories of R. A. Alston, B. L. Turner, and T. J. Mabry in the Department of Botany ...

show abstract

“…Interest in the flower colour inheritance in crosses between Silene dioica and S. alba dates back to Bartram, 1699-1777(Zirkle, 1935. Numerous authors -reviewed by Love (1944) -among which Linnaeus and Mendel, studied this inheritance.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%