Floral biology of Senecio macrophyllus M. Bieb. (Asteraceae), a rare Central European steppe plant

• Autorzy: Czarnecka B. , Denisow B.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Knowledge of the flowering phase and plant pollination ecology is very important for understanding the life history of long-lived perennials. In the case of rare species, the information may have implications for conservation practices. Our studies on flower morphology and blooming biology of the vulnerable plant Senecio macrophyllus M. BIEB. were conducted in situ (flowering, activity of insect visitors) in the largest population in SE Poland and in laboratory (light and scanning electron microscopy). The disc florets open diurnally with most intensive anthesis in the early afternoon and attract insect visitors with nectar and pollen. In highly protandrous disc florets, pollen viability decreases in time, whereas stigma receptivity increases. The upper part of the pistil forms a brush-like pollen presenter, covered with unicellular trichomes with chromoplasts. Pollen presentation lasts 4–11 hours per floret, and 8 days in a single head, the main function of which is to extend the availability of male gamets for reproduction. The number of florets per head, the head size, and the number of pollen grains produced per anther, and the pollen grain viability differed significantly between microsites. The finding indicates that, apart from the biotic factors, abiotic conditions may considerably influence generative reproduction of the species. In the study area, the principal visitors of S. macrophyllus flowers were Hymenoptera, with predominance of Apis mellifera (53.4% of visits). The remarkable share of butterflies (13.9%) recognized as the long-distance moving insects may improve the genetic variability of individuals within a fragmented population. A more detailed study is necessary to explain the role of insect visitors in effective pollination and in gene transfer between patches. The assessment of optimal conditions for the generative reproduction is fundamental for the in situ conservation of this rare species.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

floral biology; Senecio macrophyllus; Compositae; rare species; insect visitation; female phase; male phase; pollen production; pollen viability; Central Europe; steppe plant

• Wydawca: -
• Czasopismo: Acta Societatis Botanicorum Poloniae
• Rocznik: 2014
• Tom: 83
• Numer: 1
• Opis fizyczny: p.17-27,fig.,ref.

Twórcy

autor

Czarnecka B.

• Department of Ecology, Maria Curie-Skłodowska University, Akademicka 19, 20-033 Lublin, Poland

autor

Denisow B.

• Department of Botany, University of Life Sciences in Lublin, Akademicka 15, 20-950 Lublin, Poland

Bibliografia

• 1. Schemske DW, Husband BC, Ruckelshaus MH, Goodwillie C, Parker IM, Bishop JG. Evaluating approaches to the conservationrare and endangered plants. Ecology. 1994;75(3):584. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1941718
• 2. Potts SG, Biesmeijer JC, Kremen C, Neumann P, Schweiger O, Kunin WE. Global pollinator declines: trends, impacts and drivers. Trends Ecol Evol. 2010;25(6):345–353. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2010.01.007
• 3. Adams MS, Saravanan JM. Pollination ecology and evolution in Compositae (Asteraceae). Enfield, NH: Science Publishers; 1999.
• 4. Charlesworth D, Charlesworth B. Inbreeding depression and its evolutionary consequences. Ann Rev Ecol Syst. 1987;18(1):237–268.http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.es.18.110187.001321
• 5. Hiscock S. Self-incompatibility in Senecio squalidus L. (Asteraceae). Ann Bot. 2000;85:181–190. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/anbo.1999.1058
• 6. Comes HP. Selfing ability and male sterility in Senecio vernalis Waldst. et Kit. (Asteraceae) from Israel. Isr J Plant Sci. 1994;42(2):89–103.http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07929978.1994.10676561
• 7. Proctor MCF, Yeo P, Lack A. The natural history of pollination. Portland, OR: Timber Press; 1996.
• 8. Zarzycki K, Kaźmierczakowa R, editors. Polish red data book of plants. Pteridophytes and flowering plants. Cracow: W. Szafer Institute ofBotany, Polish Academy of Sciences; 2001.
• 9. Lowe A, Abbott RJ. A new British species Senecio eboracensis (Asteraceae) another hybrid derivative of S. vulgaris L. and S. squalidusL. Watsonia. 2003;24:375–388.
• 10. Grombone-Guaratini MT, Solferini VN, Semir J. Reproductive biology in species of Bidens L. (Asteraceae). Sci Agric. 2004;61(2):185–189.http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0103-90162004000200010
• 11. Kratochwil A, Beil M, Schwabe A. Complex structure of pollinatorplant interaction-webs: random, nested, with gradients or modules?Apidologie. 2009;40(6):634–650. http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/apido/2009062
• 12. Czarnecka B, Kucharczyk M. Senecio macrophyllus M. Bieb. In: Zarzycki K, Kaźmierczakowa R, editors. Polish red data book of plants. Pteridophytes and flowering plants. Cracow: W. Szafer Institute ofBotany, Polish Academy of Sciences; 2001. p. 375–377.
• 13. Zarzycki K, Szeląg Z. Red list of the vascular plants in Poland. In: Mirek Z, Zarzycki K, Wojewoda W, Szeląg Z, editors. Red list of plantsand fungi in Poland. Cracow: W. Szafer Institute of Botany, PolishAcademy of Sciences; 2006. p. 9–20.
• 14. Czarnecka B. Biology and ecology of the island populations of Senecio rivularis (Waldst. et Kit.) DC. and Senecio umbrosus Waldst. et Kit. Lublin: Maria Curie-Skłodowska University Press; 1995.
• 15. Czarnecka B. Large-scale vs. small-scale factors affecting flowering patterns in Senecio macrophyllus M. BIEB., a long-lived perennial.Acta Agrobot. 2006;59(1):233. http://dx.doi.org/10.5586/aa.2006.023
• 16. Czarnecka B. The dynamics of the population of a steppe perennial Senecio macrophyllus M. BIEB. during xerothermic grassland overgrowing.Acta Soc Bot Pol. 2009;78(3):247. http://dx.doi.org/10.5586/asbp.2009.032
• 17. Czarnecka B. Studies of a steppe perennial Senecio macrophyllus M. Bieb., a “special care” species: from landscape to molecular level. In: Barančoková M, Krajčí J, Kollár J, Belčáková I, editors. Landscape ecology – methods, applications and interdisciplinary approach. Bratislava: Institute of Landscape Ecology, Slovak Academy of Sciences;2010. p. 559–574.
• 18. Zych M, Jakubiec A. Pollination of Polish red list plants: a preliminary statistical survey. Acta Agrobot. 2008;61(1):85. http://dx.doi.org/10.5586/aa.2008.011
• 19. Cruden RW. Pollen-ovule ratio: a conservative indicator of breeding systems in flowering plants. Evolution. 1977;31(1):32. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2407542
• 20. Cruden RW. Pollen grains: why so many? Plant Syst Evol. 2000;222(1– 4):143–165. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00984100
• 21. Schmitt J. Pollinator foraging behaviour and gene dispersal in Senecio (Compositae). Evolution. 1980;34(5):934. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2407999
• 22. Herrera CM. Pollinator abundance, morphology, and flower visitation rate: analysis of the “quantity” component in a plant-pollinator system.Oecologia. 1989;80(2):241–248. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00380158
• 23. Pacini E, Franchi GG. Role of the tapetum in pollen and spore dispersal. In: Hesse M, Pacini E, Willemse M, editors. The tapetum.Vienna: Springer Vienna; 1993. p. 1–11. (vol 7). http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7091-6661-1_1
• 24. Hong L, Shen H, Ye W, Cao H, Wang Z. Secondary pollen presentation and style morphology in the invasive weed Mikania micrantha in South China. Bot Stud. 2008;49:253–260.
• 25. Parihar J, Hamal IA, Chibber N, Sharma N. Pollination mechanism and indirect pollen presentation in Artemisia maritima L. Intern JPlant Reprod Biol. 2009;1:191–193.
• 26. Haratym W, Weryszko-Chmielewska E. The ecological features of flowers and inflorescences of two species of the genus Petasites Miller(Asteraceae). Acta Agrobot. 2012;65(2):37. http://dx.doi.org/10.5586/aa.2012.056
• 27. Goulson D. Foraging strategies of insects for gathering nectar and pollen, and implications for plant ecology and evolution. Perspect Plant Ecol Evol Syst. 1999;2(2):185–209. http://dx.doi. org/10.1078/1433-8319-00070
• 28. Bożek M. Pollen efficiency and foraging by insect pollinators in three catnip (Nepeta L.) species. J Api Sci. 2003;4:19–25.
• 29. Denisow B. Blooming biology and pollen abundance of some Centaurea sp. J Api Sci. 2006;50:13–20.
• 30. Denisow B. Pollen production, flowering and insect visits on Euphorbia cyparissias L. and Euphorbia virgultosa Klok. J Api Res.2009;48(1):50–59. http://dx.doi.org/10.3896/IBRA.1.48.1.11
• 31. Howell GJ, Slater AT, Knox RB. Secondary pollen presentation in Angiosperms and its biological significance. Aust J Bot. 1993;41(5):417.http://dx.doi.org/10.1071/BT9930417
• 32. Khanduri VP. Variation in anthesis and pollen presentation in plants. Am-Euroasian J Agric Env Sci. 2011;11:843–836.
• 33. Lloyd DG, Webb CJ. The avoidance of interference between the presentation of pollen and stigmas in angiosperms I. Dichogamy.N Z J Bot. 1986;24(1):135–162. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0028825X.1986.10409725
• 34. Leins P, Erbar C. On the mechanisms of secondary pollen presentation in the Campanulales-Asterales complex. Bot Acta. 1990;103:87–92.
• 35. Ladd PG. Pollen presenters in the flowering plants – form and function. Bot J Linn Soc. 1994;115(3):165–195. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/bojl.1994.1040
• 36. Feldman TS. The plot thickens: does low density affect visitation and reproductive success in a perennial herb, and are these effectsaltered in the presence of a co-flowering species? Oecologia.2008;156(4):807–817. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00442-008-1033-y
• 37. Ovaskainen O, Smith AD, Osborne JL, Reynolds DR, Carreck NL, artin AP, et al. Tracking butterfly movements with harmonic radar reveals an effect of population age on movement distance. Proc NatlAcad Sci USA. 2008;105(49):19090–19095. http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0802066105
• 38. Mitchell RJ, Irwin RE, Flanagan RJ, Karron JD. Ecology and evolution of plant-pollinator interactions. Ann Bot. 2009;103(9):1355–1363.http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcp122
• 39. Essenberg CJ. Scale-dependent shifts in the species composition of flower visitors with changing floral density. Oecologia.2012;171(1):187–196. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00442-012-2391-z
• 40. Mirek Z, Piękoś-Mirkowa H, Zając A, Zając M, editors. Vascular plants of Poland: a checklist. Cracow: W. Szafer Institute of Botany,Polish Academy of Sciences; 2002.
• 41. Bogdanowicz W, Chudzicka E, Pilipiuk I, Skibińska E, editors. Fauna of Poland. Characteristics and checklist of species. Warsaw: Museumof Institute of Zoology, Polish Academy of Sciences; 2004. (vol 1).
• 42. Fauna Europaea [Internet]. 2013 [cited 2013 Aug 29]; Available from: http://www.faunaeur.org
• 43. Dafni A. Pollination ecology: a practical approach. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1992.
• 44. Moore PD, Webb JA, Collinson ME. Pollen analysis. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publications; 1991.
• 45. Czarnecka B, Ptaszyńska A. Genetic diversity within the island population of Senecio macrophyllus M. Bieb. (Asteraceae), a vulnerablespecies in Poland. Scr Fac Rerum Nat Univ Ostrav. 2008;186:231–235.
• 46. Wild JD, Mayer E, Gottsberger G. Pollination and reproduction of Tussilago farfara (Asteraceae). Bot Jahrb. 2003;124(3):273–285. http://dx.doi.org/10.1127/0006-8152/2003/0124-0273
• 47. Castellanos MC, Wilson P, Keller SJ, Wolfe AD, Thomson JD. Anther evolution: pollen presentation strategies when pollinators differ. AmNat. 2006;167(2):288–296. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/498854
• 48. Denisow B. Pollen production of selected ruderal plant species in the Lublin area. Lublin: University of Life Sciences in Lublin Press; 2011.
• 49. Robertson AW, Lloyd DG. Rates of pollen deposition and removal in Myosotis colensoi. Func Ecol. 1993;7(5):549. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2390131
• 50. Sargent RD, Roitberg BD. Seasonal decline in male-phase duration in a protandrous plant: a response to increased mating opportunities?Func Ecol. 2000;14(4):484–489. http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2435.2000.00453.x
• 51. Harper JL, Wood WA. Senecio jacobaea L. J Ecol. 1957;45(2):617–637. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2256946
• 52. Knuth P. Handbuch der Blütenbiologie. Leipzig: Verlag von Wilhelm Engelman; 1898. (vol 2).
• 53. Shaffer ML. Minimum population sizes for species conservation. BioScience. 1981;31(2):131–134. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1308256
• 54. Frankel OH, Brown AND, Burdon JJ. The conservation of plant biodiversity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1995.
• 55. Czarnecka B. The effect of changes of xerothermic communitie s on the population fates of Senecio macrophyllus M. Bieb., a long-lived steppeplant (White Mountain, the Tomaszów Roztocze). In: Ratyńska H,Waldon B, editors. Xerothermic grasslands in Poland – the currentstate and perspectives of protection. Bydgoszcz: Kazimierz WielkiUniversity in Bydgoszcz Press; 2010. p. 301–316.
• 56. Larsson M. Higher pollinator effectiveness by specialist than generalist flower-visitors of unspecialized Knautia arvensis (Dipsacaceae).Oecologia. 2005;146(3):394–403. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00442-005-0217-y
• 57. Andersson S. Floral display and pollination success in Achillea ptarmica (Asteraceae). Ecography. 1991;14(3):186–191. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0587.1991.tb00651.x
• 58. Douglas KL, Cruden RW. he reproductive biology of Anemone canadensis (Ranunculaceae): breeding system and facilitation of sexualselection. Am J Bot. 1994;81(3):314. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2445458
• 59. Denisow B, Wrzesień M, Cwener A. The estimation of Adonis vernalis populations in chosen patches of Lublin Upland. Acta Agrobot.2008;61(1):3. http://dx.doi.org/10.5586/aa.2008.001
• 60. Larson BMH, Barrett SCH. A comparative analysis of pollen limitation in flowering plants. Biol J Linn Soc. 2000;69(4):503–520. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8312.2000.tb01221.x
• 61. Franzén M, Larsson M. Seed set differs in relation to pollen and nectar foraging flower visitors in an insect-pollinatedherb. Nord J Bot. 2009;27(4):274–283. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-1051.2009.00348.x

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.5586/asbp.2014.002