4.4 Article

Structure of the stigma and style of Callaeum psilophyllum (Malpighiaceae) and its relation with potential pollinators

期刊

PROTOPLASMA
卷 255, 期 5, 页码 1433-1442

出版社

SPRINGER WIEN
DOI: 10.1007/s00709-018-1245-x

关键词

Morphology; Anatomy; Ultrastructure; Centris; Cuticle

资金

  1. Agencia Nacional de Promocion Cientifica y Tecnologica [PICT 2013-1867]
  2. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Cientificas y Tecnicas [PIP 11220110100312]
  3. Universidad de Buenos Aires [UBACyT 20020130200203BA]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The family Malpighiaceae, particularly in the Neotropic, shows a similar floral morphology. Although floral attraction and rewards to pollinators are alike, stigmas and styles show more diversity. The stigmas were described covered with a thin and impermeable cuticle that needs to be ruptured by the mechanical action of the pollinators. However, this characteristic was only mentioned for a few species and the anatomy and ultrastructure of the stigmas were not explored. In this work, we analyze the morphology, anatomy, and ultrastructure of the stigma and style of Callaeum psilophyllum. Moreover, we identify the potential pollinators in order to evaluate how the disposition of the stigmas is related with their size and its role in the exposure of the receptive stigmatic surface. Our observations indicate that Centris flavifrons, C. fuscata, C. tarsata, and C. trigonoides are probably efficient pollinators of C. psilophyllum. The three stigmas are covered by a cuticle that remained intact in bagged flowers. The flowers exposed to visitors show the cuticle broken, more secretion in the intercellular spaces between sub-stigmatic cells and abundant electron-dense components inside vacuoles in stigmatic papillae. This indicates that the stigmas prepares in similar ways to receive pollen grains, but the pollinator action is required to break the cuticle, and once pollen tubes start growing, stigmatic and sub-stigmatic cells release more secretion by a granulocrine process.

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

4.4
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