Towards a unified terminology for angiosperm reproductive systems

Abstract

Angiosperms display an enormous diversity of forms, functions and strategies when it comes to reproduction. This multiplicity has been translated into several terminological concepts and contexts, which have facilitated further research. On the other hand, the use of terms that address the reproduction of flowering plants has been shown to be inconsistent in the literature, complicating communication among specialists. Key terms, such as "reproductive system", "mating system" and "sexual system", among others, have been frequently cited as synonyms, and even used in different circumstances. This review proposes to establish a consistent nomenclatural classification in the field of angiosperms reproductive biology in order to facilitate communication among researchers. Specific terms related to angiosperm reproduction are conceptualized and distributed into five general systems: four related to sexual reproduction (sexual, floral, incompatibility and mating systems); and one related to asexual reproduction (apomictic systems). Our proposal is not to establish a natural classification, but rather to provide a general overview of the main concepts that were grouped here in an artificial and functional manner. Our aim is to advance the field of reproductive biology of angiosperms with consistent and well-defined applications of relevant terminologies.

Drivers of large‐scale geographical variation in sexual systems of woody plants

“…In total, our dataset comprised 10,449 species from 1,082 genera and 157 families and accounted for 93.76% of all woody plants found in China (Supporting Information Table S1). We classified all these species into three categories based on their sexual system, following Cardoso et al (2018): The sexual systems of a few species are likely to vary (e.g., Dorken et al, 2017;Schoen, 1982) in response to local abiotic or biotic conditions (e.g., climate variables or pollinator densities; Barrett & Harder, 2017). Such species were excluded from the final dataset used in this study.…”

“…By combining these data with high-resolution species distribution maps, we have explored the geographical variation in the composition of sexual systems of woody plants in China and their potential abiotic (climatic) and biotic (plant traits and evolutionary age) drivers. We classified all these species into three categories based on their sexual system, following Cardoso et al (2018): dioecy (i.e., plant species with separate male and female individuals), monoecy (i.e., plant species with both staminate and pistillate flowers occurring in the same individual but not in the same flower) and hermaphrodites (i.e., plant species with both functional stamens and pistils in the same flower). (Goldberg et al, 2017).…”

Spatial Patterns and Drivers of Angiosperm Sexual Systems in China Differ Between Woody and Herbaceous Species

“…We classified all species into three categories according to their sexual systems following Cardoso et al (2018) : dioecy (separate male and female individuals), monoecy (having pistils and stamens on separate flowers of the same plant), and hermaphrodites (having both male and female sex organs on the same flower). The category of dioecy includes the androdioecious , gynodioecious , and polygamodioecious species, while monoecy includes the monoecious , andromonoecious , and gynomonoecious species.…”

Inacurácia em espécies distílicas de Rubiaceae

“…In this sense, intra-individual floral variability can affect plant fitness, influencing the visitation frequency and pollination success (Dai et al 2016). reproductive success, acting as mechanisms to promote self-and/or cross-pollination (Cardoso et al 2018). For instance, distyly is a genetically controlled floral polymorphism composed of two floral morphs that differ in stigma and anther heights in the same population (Ganders 1979;.…”

“…For instance,Arceo-Gómez et al (2017) studied intra-individual hercogamy (stigma-anther separation) variation in Ipomoea wolcottiana (Convolvulaceae) and related it to the selection to prevent self-pollen deposition. Nevertheless, the intraindividual variation has been less discussed among floral systems (sensuCardoso et al 2018), especially concerning floral polymorphisms. These polymorphisms optimize…”