4.3 Article

Pollen competition and environmental effects on hybridization dynamics between Phlox drummondii and Phlox cuspidata

Journal

EVOLUTIONARY ECOLOGY
Volume 22, Issue 2, Pages 229-241

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10682-007-9174-8

Keywords

hybridization; interspecific pollen competition; population differentiation; post-pollination pollen performance; reproductive isolation; soil calcium environment

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Pollen competition between species strongly influences hybridization dynamics in plants. By performing single- and mixed-donor pollinations, we show that soil Ca alters the outcome of interspecific pollen competition in the annual Phlox hybrid system of Phlox cuspidata and P. drummondii. In the absence of interspecific pollen competition, heterospecific pollen siring success of both species was influenced most strongly by the maternal growth environment, such that hybridization was facilitated when heterospecific pollen was deposited on stigmas of maternal plants growing in high Ca soils. When heterospecific pollen was forced to compete against conspecific pollen, however, the maternal growth environment did not influence hybridization, but the environmental origin of heterospecific pollen did, and this effect depended on the maternal species. Pollen of P. drummondii was more effective at outcompeting P. cuspidata pollen and preventing hybridization in P. drummondii dams when P. cuspidata pollen was derived from low Ca. Pollen competition within pistils of P. cuspidata was unaffected by pollen Ca environment. In situations in which P. cuspidata grows in lower soil Ca than P. drummondii, as has been documented in one population, these results suggest that the competitive ability of heterospecific pollen will be diminished by environmental effects of soil Ca. Thus, the environment in which pollen develops can influence interspecific pollen competition and hybridization frequency.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available