4.7 Article

Temporal Distinction between Male and Female Floral Organ Development in Nicotiana tabacum cv. Xanthi (Solanaceae)

Journal

PLANTS-BASEL
Volume 9, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/plants9010127

Keywords

Nicotiana tabacum; Solanaceae; tobacco; plastochron index; pistil; carpel; anther; stamen

Categories

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31100174, 31872247]
  2. Graduate Student Research and Scholarship Committee

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Early floral developmental investigations provide crucial evidence for phylogenetic and molecular studies of plants. The developmental and evolutionary mechanisms underlying the variations in floral organs are critical for a thorough understanding of the diversification of flowers. Ontogenetic comparisons between anthers and pistil within single flowers were characterized over time in Nicotiana tabacum cv. Xanthi. The ages of 42 tobacco flower or flower primordia were estimated using corolla growth analysis. Results showed that the protodermal layer in carpel primordia contributes to carpel development by both anticlinal and periclinal divisions. Periclinal divisions in the hypodermal layer of the placenta were observed around 4.8 +/- 1.3 days after the formation of early carpel primordia (ECP) and ovule initiation occurred 10.0 +/- 0.5 days after ECP. Meiosis in anthers and ovules began about 8.9 +/- 1.1 days and 14.4 +/- 1.3 days after ECP, respectively. Results showed an evident temporal distinction between megasporogenesis and microsporogenesis. Flower ages spanned a 17-day interval, starting with flower primordia containing the ECP and anther primordia to the tetrad stage of meiosis in megasporocytes and the bicellular stage in pollen grains. These results establish a solid foundation for future studies in order to identify the developmental and molecular mechanisms responsible for the mating system in tobacco.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available