A Dynamic Multidisciplinary Approach to Floral Morphology

Rutishauser, Rolf

doi:10.1007/978-3-642-75154-7_4

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 110 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…, Oldeman and Tomlinson, 1978 ;Edelin, 1991 ;Oldeman and Vester, 1996) ; (5) the elaboration of perspectivism (general principle of complementarity) according to which contrasting or contradictory models (or conceptual frameworks) are complementary (not antagonistic) to each other (see Rutishauser and Sattler, 1985). An example is the complementarity of the classical model (according to which the shoot consists of stem(s) and leaves) and the metameric model that constructs the whole shoot of metamers only (Rutishauser and Sattler, 1985 : Table 1 and below) ; (6) the rediscovery of homeosis which has led to an increased integration of molecular genetics and morphogenesis (see, for example, Meyen, 1973Meyen, , 1987Cusset, 1982 ;Sattler, 1988Sattler, , 1994Rutishauser, 1989Rutishauser, , 1993Coen, 1991, Meyerowitz, 1995. Homeosis also fundamentally affects the notion of homology (Sattler, 1988(Sattler, , 1994 ; see point (8) below ; (7) the elaboration of a continuum view of plant form (Sattler, 1974) and its confirmation by multivariate analysis (Sattler and Jeune, 1992 ;Cusset, 1994).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Fundamental Relevance of Morphology and Morphogenesis to Plant Research

Sattler¹

1997

Annals of Botany

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Plant morphology, including morphogenesis, remains relevant to practically all disciplines of plant biology such as molecular genetics, physiology, ecology, evolutionary biology and systematics. This relevance derives from the fact that other disciplines refer to or imply morphological concepts, conceptual frameworks of morphology, and morphological theories. Most commonly, morphology is equated with classical morphology and its conceptual framework. According to this, flowering plants and certain other taxa are reduced to the mutually exclusive categories of root, stem (caulome) and leaf (phyllome). This ignores the fact that plant morphology has undergone fundamental conceptual, theoretical and philosophical innovation in recent times. These changes, when recognized, can fundamentally affect research in various disciplines of plant biology. They may even change the questions that are asked and thus may affect the direction of future research. If, for example, plant diversity and evolution are seen as a dynamic continuum, then compound leaves can be seen as intermediate between simple leaves and whole shoots. Recent results in molecular genetics support this view. Phylogenetically, this could mean that compound leaves are the result of developmental hybridization, i.e. partial homeosis. Many other examples are given to illustrate the relevance and potential impact of basic conceptual and theoretical innovations in plant morphology.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Fundamental Relevance of Morphology and Morphogenesis to Plant Research

Sattler¹

1997

Annals of Botany

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The floral homeotic genes ofArabidopsis and Antirrhinum permit normal floral organs to be produced in nontypical positions, and leaves and buds can occur in reversed sites in Utricularia longifolia (Brugger and Rutishauser, 1989;Bowman, Smyth, and Meyerowitz, 1991;Co en et aI., 1991). In some cases, only some of the morphogenetic genes become active at the nontypical site and the resulting tissue or organ is a novel mixture of features; these have been termed mosaic tissues (Rutishauser, 1989). The cortex and stem epidermis of succulent cacti may be developmental mosaics, partially controlled by genes that had controlled leaf morphogenesis in the leafy ancestral cacti (Sajeva and Mauseth, 1991;Mauseth and Sajeva, 1992).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Developmentally Variable, Polymorphic Woods in Cacti

Mauseth

Plemons

1995

American J of Botany

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sixteen genera of cacti were discovered to have polymorphic wood, that is, the plants produce one type of wood while young but a different type when older. The polymorphisms are: fibrous wood (with vessels and scanty paratracheal parenchyma) followed by parenchymatous wood (with vessels but few or no fibers) (Hylocereus venezuelensis, Dendrocereus nudiflorus, Borzicactus humboldtii, Haageocereus australis. Morawetzia sericata, Stephanocereus leucostele, Trichocereus schickendantzii); WBT wood (with wide-band tracheids, vessels, and apotracheal parenchyma but few or no fibers) followed by fibrous wood (Buiningia aurea, Oreocereus celsianus, Vatricania guentheri); WBT wood followed by parenchymatous wood (Echinopsis tubiflora, Gymnocalycium marsoneri, G. oenanthemum, Notocactus warasii, Parodia maassii); trimorphic wood in which WBT wood is followed by fibrous wood, which is followed by parenchymatous wood (Melocactus intortus, Arrojadoa braunii). The different phases within each plant may differ in vessel cluster size, percentage of the vessels that are solitary, diameter of vessels, and lignification of ray cells. Several of these genera are not closely related to the others, so wood polymorphism may have arisen several times.

show abstract

Homology, Homeosis, and Process Morphology in Plants

Sattler

1994

Homology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A Dynamic Multidisciplinary Approach to Floral Morphology

Cited by 4 publications

References 110 publications

The Fundamental Relevance of Morphology and Morphogenesis to Plant Research

The Fundamental Relevance of Morphology and Morphogenesis to Plant Research

Developmentally Variable, Polymorphic Woods in Cacti

Homology, Homeosis, and Process Morphology in Plants

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About