4.1 Article

Flower and seed production as affected by axis category and shoot size in two Patagonian Nothofagus species

Journal

BOTANY
Volume 90, Issue 4, Pages 261-272

Publisher

CANADIAN SCIENCE PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.1139/B11-103

Keywords

annual shoot; axis category; staminate flower; pistillate flower; axillary bud; seed viability

Categories

Funding

  1. Universidad Nacional del Comahue [UNC B 138]
  2. CONICET [PIP 112 200801 01026]
  3. INTA (Argentina) [PNFOR4232]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Flower distribution within the tree crown may affect both pollination dynamics and the costs of flowering on tree growth. For Nothofagus obliqua (Mirb.) Oerst. and Nothofagus nervosa (Phil.) Krasser, the production of flowers and viable seeds were compared among axes of contrasting size and category in the tree crown. For annual shoots arising from three axis categories (main branches, secondary branches, and twigs), the numbers of nodes, staminate flowers, pistillate flowers and axillary buds, and seed viability were evaluated. Most flowering shoots produced both staminate and pistillate flowers. The number of flowers of each type was related positively with the number of nodes of the shoot. Longer shoots had proportionally more pistillate flowers than short shoots. The three axis categories produced both flower types in direct proportion to the size of their shoots, but main branches presented more axillary vegetative buds than secondary branches and twigs. For N. obliqua, the percentage of viable seeds was lower in secondary branches than in main branches and twigs, perhaps owing to a lower probability of cross-pollination in secondary branches. The coexistence of vegetative and reproductive functions may cause interference between them. Massive allocation of meristems to flowering reduces meristem availability for growth and, especially, flowering in the following growing season.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available