The Botanical Review 65(4)
Interpreting Botanical Progress
October-December 1999
The Inflorescence: Introduction
Shirley Tucker and James Grimes...................................................303
Inflorescence Morphology, Heterochrony, and Phylogeny in the
Mimosoid Tribes Ingeae and Acacieae (Leguminosae: Mimosoideae)
James Grimes......................................................................317
Capitula in the Asterdae: A Widespread and Varied Phenomenon
Elizabeth M. Harris................................................................348
Morphologicl Traffic between the Inflorescence and the Vegetative
Shoot in Helobial Monocotyledons
W. Alan Charlton and Usher Posluszny...............................................370
Inflorescence Architecture: A Developmental Genetics Approach
Susan Singer, John Sollinger, Sonja Maki, Jason Fishbach,
Brad Short, Catherine Reinke, Jennifer Fick, Laura Cox,
Andrew McCall and Heidi Mullen....................................................386
Instructions to Contributors
Order Form
Inflorescence Morphology, Heterochrony, and Phylogeny in the
Mimosoid Tribes Ingeae and Acacieae (Leguminosae: Mimosoideae)
James Grimes
Royal Botanic Gardens, Melbourne
Birdwood Ave, South Yarra 3141
Victoria, Australia
I. Abstract
In earlier work (Grimes, 1992) on inflorescence morphology in the mimosoid tribes Ingeae and
Acacieae I proposed that differences in inflorescence morphology result from three properties:
the organization of components of the inflorescence and their relative positions; the
hierarchical arrangement of the axes of the inflorescence and the position they assume in total
tree architecture; and the heterochronic development of components of the inflorescence.
Further work shows that the first two properties are better stated in terms of heterochrony;
namely, that the organization of components of the inflorescence differs due to differences
in timing of the development of organ systems and that the hierarchy of axes likewise differs
due to heterochronic changes. Neither de novo origin of organs or organ systems nor suppression
or loss of organs or organ systems accounts for the diversity in form. Observed heterochronic
differences in the inflorescence structure may be divided into three types: spatial differences
in the relationship between the unit inflorescence and the subtending leaf (hysteranthy);
differences in the time of formation and/or the duration of whole axes; and changes in
development pathways, leading to shoot dimorphism. These heterochronies are used as characters
in a cladistic analysis, and it is shown that although some are homoplasious, many provide
synapomorphies of clades of exemplars representing genera in the Ingeae and Acacieae.
Click Here to Go to Back to Top
Capitula in the Asterdae: A Widespread and Varied Phenomenon
Elizabeth M. Harris
The Ohio State University Herbarium
Museum of Biological Diversity
1315 Kinnear Road
Columbus, OH 43212
I. Abstract
The presence of capitula, the head-type of inflorescences, is widespread in the Asterideae.
Several families, predominantly terminal in the clade, display the tendency of maximizing
reproductive output by condensing indeterminate inflorescences to the point of capitulum
formation. This is accomplished by the process of halting or suppressing development of the
internodes, an example of paedomorphosis of the progenesis type. This tendency is either
infrequent or absent in the basal members of the Asteridae. When inflorescence condensation
is present, closely related taxa often demonstrate the progression of the paedomorphosis. More
examples of capitulum formation are found in the more advanced families, culminating with the
Asteraceae, almost all of which display fully condensed capitula of some sort. Other phenomena
are also apparent besides the basic inflorescence condensation. Edge effects are often seen,
ranging from a mere crowding of the outermost flowers to the formation of additional flower
types. In some taxa, inflorescence condensation continues beyond the basic capitulum form,
yielding even more condensed inflorescences that then become determinate. More highly
condensed inflorescences have independently evolved several times in the Asteraceae, and some
tertiarily condensed inflorescences have evolved as well. Click Here to Go to Back to Top
Zusammenfassung
Die Anwesenheit der Capitula oder der Kopftypen ist bei den Asterideae weit verbreitet.
Mehrere Familien, besonders die in den Cladus endenden, zeigen die Tendenz zur
Höchstproduktion indem sie unbestimmbare Infloreszenz bis zu dem Zeitpunkt der
Capitulumbildung produzieren. Dies kommt durch einen besonderen Prozess zustande, in dem
die Architektur der Blütenentwicklung verzögert oder unterdrückt wird-ein Beispiel von
Paedomorphose des Progenese Typs. Diese Tendenz erscheint anfänglich bei den Grundgruppen
der Asteridae nur selten oder garnicht.
Wenn Infloreszenzkondensation in Erscheinung tritt, so demonstrieren die nahe verwandten
Taxa oft die Entwicklung von Paedomorphose. In den mehr fortgeschrittenen Familien finden
sich noch weitere Beispiele von Capitulumformation, die dann in den Asterideae gipfeln. Fast
alle von ihnen zeigen voll kondensierte Capitula verschiedener Art. Neben der grundlegenden
Infloreszenzkondensation sind auch noch andere Phänomene zu beobachten. Es zeigt sich oft, dass
Randeffekte verschiedenartige Resultate haben-vom lediglichen Anhaüfen der aussensituierten
Blüten bis zur Bildung von weiteren Blütentypen. In einigen Taxa wird die infloreszente
Kondensation über die Grundform des Capitulum hinaus witergeführt. Dadurch vermehren sich
die kondensierten Infloreszenzen, die schliesslich definitiv werden. Sekundärerweise haben
sich kondensierte Infloreszenzen mehrere Male unabhängig zu Asteraceae entwickelt, und
ausserdem existieren auch einige tertiäre Infloreszenzen.Click Here to Go to Back to Top
Morphologicl Traffic between the Inflorescence and the Vegetative
Shoot in Helobial Monocotyledons
W. ALAN CHARLTON and USHER POSLUSZNY
Biological Sciences Department of Botany
3.614 Stopford Building University of Guelph
Manchester University Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1
Manchester M13 9PT CANADA
UNITED KINGDOM
1. Abstract
Previous studies of reproductive structures in the helobial monocotyledons (Alismatidae)
indicate that partitioning between flower and inflorescence is not always clear (e.g. Lilaea,
Scheuchzeria) and this may be the result of ancestral, unisexual modules coming together
to form flowers and/or inflorescences. Later evolutionary changes may have included the
inflorescence becoming involved or mixed in with vegetative growth. Substitution of
vegetative buds for flowers is the simplest version, and there can be additional modifications
to the growth behaviour of the inflorescence such as horizontal growth and dorsiventrality.
In the Alismataceae and Limnocharitaceae the derivation of stolon-like structures from
inflorescences is obvious: vegetative features have been incorporated into structures which
are recognisably inflorescences. In the Hydrocharitaceae the inter-relationships between the
inflorescence and the vegetative body are much less well-defined. We have previously suggested
for Hydrocharis, where a single axillary complex can contain both inflorescence and stolons,
that the stolon is basically a sterilised inflorescence, and features of the inflorescence have
become incorporated into the vegetative body. Here we will explore this theme further for the
Hydrocharitaceae, using information from within and outside the family.
Click Here to Go to Back to Top
INFLORESCENCE ARCHITECTURE: A DEVELOPMENTAL GENETICS APPROACH
Susan Singer1, John Sollinger1, Sonja Maki2, Jason Fishbach1,
Brad Short1, Catherine Reinke1, Jennifer Fick1,
Laura Cox1, Andrew McCall1 and Heidi Mullen1
1 Department of Biology
Carleton College
Northfield, MN 55057
2 Department of Horticulture
Clemson University
Clemson, SC 29634
I. Abstract
We are characterizing a suite of Pisum sativum mutants that alter inflorescence
architecture to develop a model for the genetic regulation of inflorescence
development in a plant with a compound raceme. Such a model when compared with
those created for Antirrhinum majus and Arabidopsis thaliana, both of which have
simple racemes, should provide insight into the evolution of development of
inflorescence architecture. The highly conserved nature of cloned genes that
regulate reproductive development in plants and the morphological similarities
among our mutants and those identified in A. majus and A. thaliana enhance the
probability that a developmental genetics approach will be fruitful. Here we
describe six P. sativum mutants that affect morphologically and architecturally
distinct aspects of the inflorescence and analyze interactions among these genes.
Both vegetative and inflorescence growth of the primary axis is affected by
UNIFOLIATA which is necessary for the function of DETERMINATE (DET). DET
maintains indeterminancy in the first-order axis. In its absence, the meristem
differentiates as a stub covered with epidermal hairs. DET interacts with
VEGETATIVE1(VEG1). VEG1 appears essential for second-order inflorescence (I2)
development. veg1 mutants fail to flower or differentiate the I2 meristem into
a rudimentary stub. det veg1 double mutants produce true terminal flowers with
no stubs indicating that two genes must be eliminated for terminal flower
formation in P. sativum, whereas elimination of a single gene accomplishes this
in A. thaliana and A. majus. NEPTUNE also affects I2development by limiting
the number of flowers produced prior to stub formation to two. Its role is
independent of DET as indicated by the additive nature of the double mutant det
nep. UNI, BROC, and PIM all play roles in assigning floral meristem identity to
the third-order branch. pim mutants continue to produce inflorescence branches
resulting in a highly complex architecture and aberrant flowers. uni mutants
initiate a whorl of sepals but floral organogenesis is aberrant beyond that
developmental point and the double mutant uni pim lacks identifiable floral
organs. A wild-type phenotype is observed in broc plants, but broc enhances
the pim phenotype in the double mutant producing inflorescences that resemble
broccoli. Collectively these genes ensure that only the third-order meristem,
not higher or lower order meristems, generates floral organs, thus precisely
regulating the overall architecture of the plant.
Click Here to Go to Back to Top