Cytotaxonomic studies of three ornamental aroids

• Autorzy: Kalu E.J. , Kanu A. M.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Cytotaxanomical analysis carried out on three ornamental aroids (Anchomanes difformis, Anchomanes hookeri and Arum maculatum) proved that cytological studies is none negligible tool in phylogeny and scientific classificationns of plants. Aceto-orcein stain squash technique was used in this study. Anchomanes difformis and Anchomanes. hookeri showed more relatedness in chromosome number and chromosome morphology, sharing the same chromosome number 2n=13, while Arum maculatum has 2n=8. The following karyotypes formular were revealed: 2n=8=3M+3SM+2ST in Arum maculatum; 2n=13=5M+1SM+7ST in A. difformis; and 2n=13=3M+6SM+4 A. hookeri. Other karyotype parameters investigated like CI%, AsI and degree of asymmetry of the genomes supported current taxonomic ranking.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

Nigeria; ornamental plant; Araceae; Arum maculatum; Anchomanes hookeri; Anchomanes difformis; cytotaxonomy; karyomorphology; karyotype; asymmetry; chromosome number; chromosome morphology; aceto-orcein

• Wydawca: -
• Czasopismo: International Letters of Natural Sciences
• Rocznik: 2014
• Tom: 13
• Numer: 2
• Opis fizyczny: p.105-113,fig.,ref.

Twórcy

autor

Kalu E.J.

• Abia State Polytechnic, Aba, Nigeria

autor

Kanu A. M.

• Abia State Polytechnic, Aba, Nigeria

Bibliografia

• [1] Afolayan M. O., M. O. Omojola, A. P. Onwualu, S. A. Thomas (2012). Furhter physicochemical characterization of Anchomanes difformis starch Agri. Biol. J. North Ameri., 3(1); 31-38.
• [2] Brown E. N. (1902). Flora of Tropical Africa. 8: 137. www.plants.jstor.org/flora/flota014481
• [3] Eneojo A. S., L. O. Egwari, T. O. Mosaku (2011). In vitro antimicrobial screening on Anchomanes difformis (Blume) Engl. Leaves and rhizomes against selected pathogens of public health importance. Advan. Biol. Res., 5(4): 221-225.
• [4] Gonzalez G. E., M. F. Fourasti, J. Camara-Hernandez, L. Poggio. (2013). Comparative study of Zea karyotype. Maize Genetics cooperation newsletter, 87; 50.
• [5] Gunjan K., B. K. Roy (2010). Karyotype studies in dominant species of Aloe from Eastern India. Caryologia, 63(1); 41-49.
• [6] Hamideh J., S. M. H. Hejazi, M. S. Bayer (2009). Karyotypic studies of three Thymus (Lamiaceae) species and population in Iran. Caryologia, 62(4); 316-325.
• [7] Hejazi S. M. H. (2011). Karyological study on three Cicer L. species (Fabaceae) in Iran. Asia J. of cell Biol., 6: 97-104.
• [8] Kalvadi R., S. M. H. Hejazi, M. I. Atri, M. Mirza, Z. Jamzad, T. Safikhan (2012). Karyotype analysis among 10 populations of Thymus eriocalyx (Ronniger) Jalas species in Iran. Annals of Bio. Research., 3 (8): 3916-3925.
• [9] Lavania U. C., S. Srivastava (1992). A simple parameter of dispersion index that serves as an adjunct to karyotype asymmetry. J. Bio. Sci., 17(2): 179-182
• [10] Levan A., A. Fredga, A. A. Sanderberg (1964). Nomenclature for centromeric position in chromosome. Hereditas, 52: 201-220.
• [11] Paknia R., G. Karimzadeh (2010). Karyotypic study in some Iranian local onion populations. J. of plt. Physio. & Breeding, 1(1): 49-56.
• [12] Peruzzi L., I. J. Leitch, K. F. Caparelli (2009). Chromosome diversity and evolution in Liliaceae. Ann. Bot, 103(3): 459-475.
• [13] Srivastava S., H. M. Srivastava (2000). Cytological and karyotypic Studies in four Beta species. J. of Sugar Beet Research, 37(4): 135-142.
• [14] Stebbins G. L. (1950). Variation and evolution in plants. Columbia University Press. New York and London. p. 459.
• [15] Stebbins G. L. (1971). Chromosomal evolution in higher plants. Edward Arnold Ltd. London.