Comparative histogenesis of vegetative and floral apices in<i>Amygdalus communis</i>, with special reference to the carpel

Brooks, Reid M.

doi:10.3733/hilg.v13n05p247

Cited by 46 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 76 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A longstanding controversy in flower evolution is whether the single carpel is a terminal or lateral structure (Newman 1936a, b;Thompson 1936 a, b;Brooks 1940;Tucker & Gifford 1966). Considering the well-supported hypothesis that the carpel is a leaf homologue (Goethe 1790; although see Meeuse 1963Meeuse , 1965Meeuse , 1966 for an alternate opinion), one would expect to find vestigial evidence of the floral residuum in single-carpellate taxa, particularly if the carpel is a lateral organ (Newman 1936a,b).…”

Section: Inflorescence and Floral Formmentioning

confidence: 99%

Inflorescence and floral development of Carnarvonia (Proteaceae)

Douglas¹

1996

Telopea

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

749Douglas, Andrew w: (Royal Botanic Gardens, Melbourne, Birdwood Avenue, South Yarra, Victoria, 3141, Australia) 1996. Inflorescence and floral development of Carnarvonia (Proteaceae). Telopea 6(4): 749-774. Carnarvonia araliifolia is an endemic of north-east Queensland and the sole member of the subfamily Carnarvonioideae in Proteaceae. The inflorescence structure is atypical compared to the relatively simple racemiform architecture found in the other taxa of the family (including Grevilleoideae that has flower pairs). There is variability in numbers of flowers on a given axis, irregular branching of inflorescence axes, positions of flowers within an axillary module, numbers of flowers at a node on the principal axes, and the cauliflorous, axillary andlor terminal location of flowering regions on a branch. Carnarvonia has been hypothesized as having shared a common ancestor either with or within Grevilleoideae. Developmental evidence is examined to better define and elucidate the morphogenetic processes involved in the complex architecture of the inflorescence and flowers including the fundamental units of construction within a metameric conceptual framework. Likewise, the developmental evidence is used to examine the hypotheses of morphological derivation of the inflorescence as inferred from phylogenetic hypotheses. The inflorescence structure is interpreted as a paniculiform-raceme although terminal flowers are present on axillary inflorescence branches. There is variation within the developmental programme of the first three metamers of a subunit or axillary inflorescence branch that differs from the variation present in other Proteaceae and an inflorescence branch can vary in the number of flowers that develop. In the terminal flowers of a module, the first tepal is initiated in a position that follows the phyllotactic continuity of each subunit (2/5), the first tepal being initiated in a predictable position based on the position of the preceding bract primordium. The carpel is initiated in a lateral position, closest to both the first initiated stamen and tepal, thus maintaining the phyllotactic continuity in the flower. The ontogenetic events involved in inflorescence development in Carnarvonia clarify its morphological organization and provide morphological evidence of the derivation of the inflorescence form from a single-flowered, perhaps racemiform, ancestor.

show abstract

Section: Inflorescence and Floral Formmentioning

confidence: 99%

Inflorescence and floral development of Carnarvonia (Proteaceae)

Douglas¹

1996

Telopea

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Tucker and Gifford (1966a) followed Brooks (1940) who considered that initiation of the single terminal carpel of A mygdalus occurred before there were any visible changes in shape of the apex, when there was increased mitotic activity over the entire apex. Tucker and Gifford (1966a) followed Brooks (1940) who considered that initiation of the single terminal carpel of A mygdalus occurred before there were any visible changes in shape of the apex, when there was increased mitotic activity over the entire apex.…”

Section: Initiation Of Ovules and The Stigmatic Crests-mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Tucker and Gifford (1966a) noted the approximately contemporaneous anticlinal enlargement and periclinal division of T2 cells over the summit at this time and the absence of any specific site of initiation. According to Brooks' (1940) account the time of carpel initiation in Amygdalus is unusual in that it is considered to occur before all of the stamens have been initiated. It seems clear nonetheless from Tucker and Gifford's description, that apical meristematic activity at a time when carpel initiation is regarded as occurring, is on a more massive scale in D. lanceolata.…”

Section: Initiation Of Ovules and The Stigmatic Crests-mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Preliminary dissection of buds of the generally unicarpellate Pseudmoiniera traversii (Buchan.) In view of the distinctiveness of this mode of floral determination (Tucker, 1968) and the past controversy over the existence of truly "terminal" carpels (Newman, 1936a, b;Thompson, 1936a, b;Brooks, 1940), it seemed important to provide further documentation of the development of this phenomenon in a related member of Winteraceae. In view of the distinctiveness of this mode of floral determination (Tucker, 1968) and the past controversy over the existence of truly "terminal" carpels (Newman, 1936a, b;Thompson, 1936a, b;Brooks, 1940), it seemed important to provide further documentation of the development of this phenomenon in a related member of Winteraceae.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Origin and Development of the Terminal Carpel in Pseudowintera traversii

Sampson¹,

Kaplan²

1970

American Journal of Botany

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Flowers of Pseudowintera traversii (Buchan.) Dandy possess a terminal unicarpellate gynoecium. The present study of carpel morphogenesis was initiated for the purposes of (1) providing additional developmental documentation of the occurrence of terminal carpels in the Winteraceae and (2) comparing the mode of initiation and development of the ascidiate terminal carpel of P. traversii with the essentially conduplicate terminal carpel of Drimys lanceolata. Following its axillary origin, the floral apex of P. traversii initiates 2–3 connate sepals, 5–6 petals, 4–15 stamens, and usually a single terminal carpel, in acropetal succession. Bicarpellate gynoecia may occur with a frequency of up to 15 % on a given plant. The floral apex is zonate and shows increased expression of its zonation during later stages of floral development. The terminal carpel is ascidiate from inception and originates as a cylindrical growth around the entire circumference of the floral apex; transformation of the floral meristem into a carpel primordium terminates apical growth of the floral axis. Carpel growth continues to be cylindrical and is mediated by a ring of marginal and submarginal initials at its summit. Earlier and more extensive division of initials and their derivatives on the dorsal rim causes the primordium to become canted adaxially, shifting the apical cleft to a subterminal adaxial position. Continued marginal meristematic activity results in closure of the cleft as well as elevation and elaboration of the stigmatic crests. Five to seven bitegmic ovules are initiated at the same time as crest elaboration and arise in two rows from the adaxial (laminar) position. Carpel maturation is signified by tannin deposition and oil cell differentiation, beginning at the base and proceeding acropetally; carpel margins bordering the cleft are the last to differentiate. Carpel procambialization is continuous and acropetal from inception, with the dorsal median bundle differentiating before the ventral strands. The significance of occasional bicarpellate flowers is discussed.

show abstract

“…Brooks (1940) described ontogenesis of leaves and flowers in nonchimeral almond, Amygdalus communis L., a close relative of peach. While the structure and sequence of development of the various floral organs are adequately described by Brooks, his interpretation of the origin of the various organs and their tissues from the apical layers suffered from the lack of any genetic or cytological markers of cell lineages.…”

mentioning

confidence: 98%