4.6 Review

Plant Mating Systems Often Vary Widely Among Populations

期刊

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fevo.2018.00038

关键词

selfing; outcrossing; breeding system; pollination; self-fertilization; mating system; mixed mating; mating system evolution

类别

资金

  1. Endeavor Fellowship
  2. McKenzie Postdoctoral Fellowship
  3. NSF [1654943, 1654951]
  4. Division Of Environmental Biology
  5. Direct For Biological Sciences [1654951, 1654943] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Most flowering plants are hermaphroditic, yet the proportion of seeds fertilized by self and outcross pollen varies widely among species, ranging from predominant self-fertilization to exclusive outcrossing. A population's rate of outcrossing has important evolutionary outcomes as it influences genetic structure, effective population size, and offspring fitness. Because most mating system studies have quantified outcrossing rates for just one or two populations, past reviews of mating system diversity have not been able to characterize the extent of variation among populations. Here we present a new database of more than 30 years of mating system studies that report outcrossing rates for three or more populations per species. This survey, which includes 741 populations from 105 species, illustrates substantial and prevalent among-population variation in the mating system. Intermediate outcrossing rates (mixed mating) are common; 63% of species had at least one mixed mating population. The variance among populations and within species was not significantly correlated with pollination mode or phylogeny. Our review underscores the need for studies exploring variation in the relative influence of ecological and genetic factors on the mating system, and how this varies among populations. We conclude that estimates of outcrossing rates from single populations are often highly unreliable indicators of the mating system of an entire species.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据