4.0 Article

Seed traits of species from South Brazilian grasslands with contrasting distribution

期刊

ACTA BOTANICA BRASILICA
卷 34, 期 4, 页码 730-745

出版社

SOC BOTANICA BRASIL
DOI: 10.1590/0102-33062020abb0012

关键词

dormancy; functional traits; germination; grasslands; Iridaceae; photoinhibition; regeneration niche; reproductive ecology; seed morphology; time-to-event analysis

资金

  1. Coordenacao de Aperfeicoamento de Pessoal de Nivel Superior - Brasil (CAPES) [001]
  2. Fundacao Grupo Boticario de Protecao a Natureza [1018/20142]
  3. Capes
  4. Propesq/UFRGS
  5. CNPq [304506/2016-8]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

South Brazilian grasslands are among the most species-rich grasslands worldwide yet they have been suffering ongoing degradation due to land-use. Little is known about the reproductive ecology of the native species of these grasslands. Thus, our goal was to characterize seed traits and germination requirements of three native species of the tribe Tigridieae (Iridaceae, Iridoideae) due to its richness in the Pampa biome and the contrasting morphology, cytogenetics, and geographic distributions of its representatives. We tested if closely related species possess similar seed traits and whether species with wider distributions have broader germination requirements. Seed production and mass were estimated, and morphological analyses, germination experiments and viability tests were performed. Principal component analysis (PCA) was used to describe correlations between seed traits and species' distributions. Germination was assessed using time-to-event analysis and the Cox model. All seed traits differed among the analyzed species/cytotypes. Final germination percentage (FGP) averaged 39.1 % and with overall viability of 89.9 %. Germination tests showed that seeds benefit from negative photoblasty. Species/cytotypes with wider distributions and heavier and larger seeds generally had better germination performances than narrower distributed species/cytotypes with lighter and smaller seeds.

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

4.0
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