1891
DOI: 10.2307/2475524
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Contributions to American Bryology. II.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

1957
1957
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…, 2006), both suggesting that outcrossing is quite rare. Nevertheless, the fact that we and others have reported natural or experimental hybrids between distantly related lineages of in the moss family Funariaceae (Britton, 1895; Andrews, 1918; von Wettstein, 1932; Bauer & Brosig, 1959; Pettet, 1964; McDaniel et al. , 2010) suggests that there are few F 1 barriers to hybridization in this group.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 69%
“…, 2006), both suggesting that outcrossing is quite rare. Nevertheless, the fact that we and others have reported natural or experimental hybrids between distantly related lineages of in the moss family Funariaceae (Britton, 1895; Andrews, 1918; von Wettstein, 1932; Bauer & Brosig, 1959; Pettet, 1964; McDaniel et al. , 2010) suggests that there are few F 1 barriers to hybridization in this group.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 69%
“…The extreme differences in sporophyte morphology between Physcomitrella and Physcomitrium make hybrids between these genera easy to detect, and indeed the study of hybridization in the Funariaceae has a long history relative to that in other mosses (Natcheva and Cronberg 2004). Individuals with morphologically intermediate, presumably F1, sporophytes found on otherwise pure‐species gametophytes (i.e., maternal gametophytes bearing sporophytes produced with heterospecific sperm) have been reported between P. patens and P. sphaericum (Loeske 1929; Pettet 1964), P. patens and P. pyriforme (Andrews 1918, 1942; Loeske 1929; Pettet 1964; Tan 1978; Crum and Anderson 1981), and A. serratum and P. pyriforme (Britton 1895; Crum and Anderson 1981). However, we found no genealogical evidence of hybridization between species with extreme differences in sporophyte morphology.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Both genera are cosmopolitan in distribution, but Physcomitrium is more diverse than Physcomitrella, with a total of seven species found in Europe and temperate North America (Crum and Anderson 1981; Hill et al 2006). Populations containing species of both genera are frequent in some habitats, and hybrids are widely reported (Britton 1895; Andrews 1918; Loeske 1929; Andrews 1942; Pettet 1964; Tan 1978). Therefore, the evolutionary relationships within the Physcomitrella–Physcomitrium complex may not be captured by a single gene or organelle, because ongoing hybridization may cause different parts of the genome to have different histories.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%