Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Reproductive effort in desert versus mediterranean crucifers: the allogamous Erucaria rostrata and E. hispanica and the autogamous Erophila minima

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Oecologia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Components of the total sexual investment of plants growing under mediterranean climatic and edaphic conditions were compared with those of plants growing in the desert, in the closely related allogamous species pair Erucaria hispanica and E. rostrata and in populations of the autogamous species Erophila minima. In all cases lower total investment was evident in the desert plants. At the prezygotic phase it was expressed by (1) reduced production of flowers; (2) lower allocation to the production of male gametophytes and some floral organs; and (3) packaging of more ovules per ovary. The ratio of reproductive: vegetative biomass which was found to be greater in the desert plants and their lower pollen: ovule ratio are perhaps indicative of greater efficiency. Their smaller investment at the postzygotic phase was expressed in: (1) reduction in total numbers of fruits and seeds; (2) decrease in seed size and weight. Yet in the desert plants the number of seeds per total biomass was found to be significantly larger and fertility rates (seed-set per ovule, fruit-set per flower per plant) were equal to or greater than those in the mediterranean plants. The trends observed in this study in desert plants, which may result in more efficient exploitation of resources, are similar in the species involved, regardless of their breeding system-autogamous or allogamous.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ackerman JD, Montalvo AM (1990) Short- and long-term limitations to fruit production in a tropical orchid. Ecology 71: 263–272

    Google Scholar 

  • Armstrong-Goldman DW, Willson MF, (1986) Sex allocation in functionally hermaphroditic plants: a review and critique. Bot Rev 52: 157–194

    Google Scholar 

  • Bawa KS, Beach JH (1981) Evolution of sexual systems in flowering plants. Ann Mo Bot Gard 68: 254–274

    Google Scholar 

  • Bertin RI (1988) Paternity in plants. In: Lovett-Doust J, Lovett-Doust L (eds) Plant reproductive ecology. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 30–59

    Google Scholar 

  • Boaz M (1989) Sexual reproductive effort and its allocations in Cruciferae plants in different phytogeographical territories. PhD thesis, The Hebrew University, Jerusalem

    Google Scholar 

  • Boaz M, Plitmann U, Heyn CC (1990) The ecogeographic distribution of breeding systems in the Cruciferae (Brassicaceae) of Israel. Isr J Bot 39: 31–42

    Google Scholar 

  • Bradshaw AD (1965) Evolutionary significance of phenotypic plasticity in plants. Adv Genet 13: 115–155

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell DR (1992) Variation in sex allocation and floral morphology in Ipomopsis aggregata (Polemoniaceae). Am J Bot 79: 516–521

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell DR, Halama KJ (1993) Resource and pollen limitations to lifetime seed production in natural plant population. Ecology 74: 1043–1051

    Google Scholar 

  • Charlesworth D, Charlesworth B (1987) The effect of investment in attractive structures on allocation to male and female functions in plants. Evolution 41: 948–968

    Google Scholar 

  • Charnov EL (1982) The theory of sex allocation (Monographs in Population Biology 18). Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Charnov EL (1987) On sex allocations and selfing in higher plants. Evol Ecol 1: 30–36

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheplick GP, Quinn JA (1982) Amphicarpum purshii and the “pessimistic strategy” in amphicarpic annuals with subterranean fruits. Oecologia 52: 327–332

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen D (1971) Maximizing final yields when growth is limited by time or by limiting resources. J Theor Biol 33: 299–307

    Google Scholar 

  • Cruden RW (1977) Pollen-ovule ratio: a conservative indicator of breeding systems in flowering plants. Evolution 31: 32–46

    Google Scholar 

  • Cruden RW, Lyons DL (1985) Patterns of biomass allocation to male and female functions in plants with different mating systems. Oecologia 66: 299–306

    Google Scholar 

  • Cumaraswamy A, Bawa KS (1989) Sex allocation and mating systems in pigeonpea, Cajanus cajan (Fabaceae). Plant Syst Evol 168: 59–69

    Google Scholar 

  • Dale MFP, Ford-Lloyd BV (1983) Reproductive characters associated with breeding behavior in Beta sect. Beta (Chenopodiaceae). Plant Syst Evol 143: 277–283

    Google Scholar 

  • Devlin B, Ellstrand N (1990). Male and female fertility variation in wild radish, a hermaphrodite. Am Nat 136: 87–107

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunn CP, Sharitz RR (1991) Population structure, biomass allocation and phenotypic plasticity in Murdannia keisak (Commelinaceae). Am J Bot 78: 1712–1723

    Google Scholar 

  • Evenson WE (1983) Experimental studies of reproductive energy allocation in plants. In: Jones CE, Little RJ (eds) Handbook of experimental pollination biology. Van Nostrand-Reinhold, New York, pp 249–274

    Google Scholar 

  • Galen C, Newport MEA (1988) Pollination quality, seed set and flower traits in Polemonium viscosum: complementary effects of variation in flower scent and size. Am J Bot 75: 900–905

    Google Scholar 

  • Hedge IC, Lamond JM (1980) Cruciferae — Brassiceae. In: Townsend CC, Guest E (eds) Flora of Iraq, vol 4. Ministry of Agriculture, Baghdad, pp 827–885

    Google Scholar 

  • Hickman JC (1975) Environmental unpredictability and plastic energy allocation strategies in the annual Polygonum cascadense (Polygonaceae). J Ecol 63: 689–701

    Google Scholar 

  • Hickman JC, Pitelka LF (1975) Dry weight indicates energy allocation in ecological analysis of plants. Oecologia 21: 117–121

    Google Scholar 

  • Jain SK (1976) The evolution of inbreeding in plants. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 74: 469–495

    Google Scholar 

  • Kang H, Primack RB (1991) Temporal variation of flower and fruit size in relation to seed yield in celandine poppy (Chelidonium majus, Papaveraceae). Am J Bot 78: 711–722

    Google Scholar 

  • Kay QON (1987) The comparative ecology of flowering. New Phytol 106: 265–281

    Google Scholar 

  • Kozlowski J, Wieger RG (1986) Optimal allocation of energy to growth and reproduction. Theor Popul Biol 29: 16–37

    Google Scholar 

  • Lloyd DG (1979) Parental strategies in Angiosperms. NZ J Bot 17: 595–606

    Google Scholar 

  • Lloyd DG (1980) Demographic factors and mating patterns in Angiosperms. Bot Monog 15: 67–88

    Google Scholar 

  • Lloyd DG (1984) Variation strategies of plants in heterogeneous environments. Biol J Linn Soc 21: 357–385

    Google Scholar 

  • Lovett-Doust J, Cavers PB (1982) Biomass allocation to hermaphrodite flowers. Can J Bot 60: 2530–2534

    Google Scholar 

  • Lyons EE, Antonovics J (1991) Breeding system evolution in Leavenworthia: Breeding system variation and reproductive success in natural populations of Leavenworthia crassa (Cruciferae). Am J Bot 78: 270–287

    Google Scholar 

  • Mione T, Anderson GJ (1992) Pollen: ovule ratios and breeding system evolution in Solanum section Basarthrum (Solanaceae). Am J Bot 79: 279–298

    Google Scholar 

  • Morita T, Hiratsuka A, Masuzawa T, Kawano S (1993) Chasmogamy vs. cleistogamy — the adaptive significance of dimorphic reproduction, with special reference to Leibnitzia anandria, a Compositae perennial (abstract). Proc. XV International Bot Congr, Yokohama, Japan, p 36

  • Newel SJ, Tramer EJ (1978) Reproductive strategies in herbaceous plants communities during succession. Ecology 59: 228–234

    Google Scholar 

  • Noy-Meir I (1986) Desert ecosystems: structure and function. In: Evenari M, Noy-Meir I, Goodall DW (eds) Hot deserts and arid shrublands. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 93–103

    Google Scholar 

  • Pitelka LF (1977) Energy allocation in annual and perennial lupines (Lupinus, Leguminosae). Ecology 58: 1055–1065

    Google Scholar 

  • Queller DC (1983) Sexual selection in a hermaphroditic plant. Nature 305: 706–707

    Google Scholar 

  • Richards (1986) Plant breeding systems. Allen and Unwin, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Samson DA, Werk KS (1986) Size dependent effects in the analysis of reproductive effort in plants. Am Nat 172: 667–680

    Google Scholar 

  • Schlichting CD (1986) The evolution of phenotypic plasticity in plants. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 17: 667–693

    Google Scholar 

  • Schoen DJ (1982) Male reproductive effort and breeding system in a hermaphroditic plant. Oecologia 53: 255–257

    Google Scholar 

  • Shmida A, Evenari M, Noy-Meir I (1986) Hot desert ecosystem: an integrated view. In: Evenari M, Noy-Meir I, Goodall DW (eds) Hot deserts and arid shrublands. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 379–387

    Google Scholar 

  • Sokal RR, Rohlf FJ (1982) Biometry, Freeman, San Francisco

    Google Scholar 

  • Solbrig OT (1976) On the relative advantages of cross and self fertilization. Ann Mo Bot Gard 63: 262–276

    Google Scholar 

  • Stanton ML, Galloway LF (1990) Natural selection and the allocation to reproduction in flowering plants. In: Mangel M (ed) Sex allocation and sex change experiments and models. American Mathematical Society, Providence, pp 1–50

    Google Scholar 

  • Stanton ML, Snow AA, Handel SN (1986) Floral evolution: attractiveness to pollinators increases male fitness. Science 232: 1625–1627

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor DR, Aarsen LW (1988) An interpretation of phenotypic plasticity in Agropyron repens (Gramineae). Am J Bot 66: 313–320

    Google Scholar 

  • Waller DM (1979) The relative costs of self and cross fertilized seeds in Impatiens capensis (Balsaminaceae). Am J Bot 66: 313–320

    Google Scholar 

  • Waller DM (1988) Plant morphology and reproduction. In: Lovett-Doust J, Lovett-Doust L (eds) Plant reproductive ecology. Oxford University Press, pp 203–227

  • Waser NM, Price MV (1991) Reproductive costs of self pollination in Ipomopsis aggregata (Polemoniaceae). Are ovules usurped? Am J Bot 78: 1036–1043

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiens D (1984) Ovule survivorship, brood size, life history, breeding systems and reproductive success in plants. Oecologia 64: 47–53

    Google Scholar 

  • Willson MF (1983) Plant reproductive ecology. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Wyatt R (1982) Inflorescence architecture: how flower number, arrrangement and phenology affect pollination and fruit-set. Am J Bot 69: 585–594

    Google Scholar 

  • Wyatt R (1984) Evolution of self-pollination in granite outcrop species of Arenaria (Caryophyllaceae). III. Reproductive effort and pollen-ovule ratios. Syst Bot 9: 432–440

    Google Scholar 

  • Zar JH (1984) Biostatical analysis. Prentice Hall, Englewood

    Google Scholar 

  • Zohary M (1966) Flora Palaestina, vol. 1. Israel Academy of Sciences, Jerusalem

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Botany, The Hebrew University, 91904, Jerusalem, Israel

    M. Boaz & U. Plitmann

  2. Department of Evolution, Ecology and Systematics, The Hebrew University, 91904, Jerusalem, Israel

    C. C. Heyn

Authors
  1. M. Boaz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. U. Plitmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. C. C. Heyn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Boaz, M., Plitmann, U. & Heyn, C.C. Reproductive effort in desert versus mediterranean crucifers: the allogamous Erucaria rostrata and E. hispanica and the autogamous Erophila minima . Oecologia 100, 286–292 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00316956

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00316956

Key words

Search

Navigation