Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T05:03:43.021Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

S gene polymorphism in Nicotiana

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 April 2009

K. K. Pandey
K. K. Pandey
Affiliation:
Grasslands Division, D.S.I.R., Palmerston North, New Zealand
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Interspecific crosses between, different genotypes and species of Nicotiana have revealed S gene polymorphism on a large scale. In the usually yellow-flowered self-compatible species N. glauca a strain occurs that has a self-incompatibility gene which is tightly linked with the bright-red corolla colour gene. In self-incompatible species, there are two kinds of self-incompatibility alleles, SI and SFI, distinguished on the basis of the acceptability of N. langsdorffii pollen. The SI form has a large number of alleles whereas the SFI form has only two, SF10 and SF11. The SI alleles are again divisible into two groups on the basis of the acceptability of N. noctiflora pollen and, on the same criterion, the two SFI alleles, SF10 and SF11, also are distinguishable. N. noctiflora and N. bonariensis plants could be divided into two and three groups respectively on the basis of interspecific compatibility relationships. When plants of each species were crossed among themselves, they formed two and three intra-incompatible and inter-compatible groups respectively, identical with those found on the basis of interspecific compatibility relationships. The significance of this observation is at present not fully understood.

Type
Research Article
Information
Genetics Research , Volume 10 , Issue 3 , December 1967 , pp. 251 - 259
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1967

References

REFERENCES

Baker, H. G. (1954). Dimorphism and incompatibility in the Plumbaginaceae. Proc. VIII Int. Bot. Congr., Sec. 10, pp. 133–134.Google Scholar
Baker, H. G. (1966). The evolution, functioning and breakdown of heteromorphic incompatibility systems. I. The Plumbaginaceae. Evolution, Lancaster, Pa. 20, 349–368.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Corkill, L. (1942). Cyanogensis in white clover (Trifolium repens L.). V. The inheritance of Cyanogenesis. N. Z Jl. Sci. Technol. 23, 178B–193B.Google Scholar
Crowe, L. K. (1955). The evolution of incompatibility in species of Oenothera. Heredity, Lond. 9, 293–322.Google Scholar
Crowe, L. K. (1964). The evolution of outbreeding in plants. I. The angiosperms. Heredity, Lond. 19, 435–457.Google Scholar
Daday, H. (1958). Gene frequencies in wild populations of Trifolium repens L. III. World distribution. Heredity, Lond. 12, 169–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Darlington, C. D. & Mather, K. (1947). The Elements of Genetics. London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd.Google Scholar
Dawson, C. D. R. (1941). Tetrasomic inheritance in Lotus corniculatus L. J. Genet. 42, 49–72.Google Scholar
Dobzhansky, Th. (1964). Genetic diversity and fitness. In Genetics Today, Proc. XI Int. Congr. Genet. 1963, pp. 541–552. London: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Dowrick, V. P. J. (1956). Heterostyly and homostyly in Primula obconica. Heredity, Lond. 10, 219–236.Google Scholar
Ford, E. B. (1965). Genetic Polymorphism. London: Faber & Faber Ltd.Google Scholar
Godley, E. J. (1955). Breeding systems in New Zealand plants. I. Fuchsia. Ann. Bot., N.S. 19, 549–559.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Godley, E. J. (1964). Breeding systems in New Zealand plants. 3. Sex ratios in some natural populations. N. Z. Jl Bot. 2, 205–212.Google Scholar
Goodspeed, T. H. (1954). The Genus Nicotiana. Waltham, Mass.: Chronica Botanica Co.Google Scholar
Kettlewell, H. B. D. (1965). Insect survival and selection for pattern. Science, N.Y. 148, 1290–1296.Google Scholar
Lewis, D. (1954 a). Comparative incompatibility in angiosperms and fungi. Adv. Genet. 6, 235–285.Google Scholar
Lewis, D. (1954 b). Incompatibility in relation to physiology, genetics and evolutionary taxonomy. Proc. VIII Int. Bot. Congr., Sec. 10, pp. 124–132.Google Scholar
Lewis, D. (1960). Genetic control of specificity and activity of the S antigen in plants. Proc. R. Soc. B. 151, 468–477.Google Scholar
Lewis, D. (1964). A protein dimer hypothesis on incompatibility. In Genetics Today, Proc. XI Int. Congr. Genet. 1963, pp. 658–663. London: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Lewis, D. & Crowe, L. K. (1956). The genetics and evolution of gynodioecy. Evolution, Lancaster, Pa. 10, 115–125.Google Scholar
Lewis, D. & Crowe, L. K. (1958). Unilateral interspecific incompatibility in flowering plants. Heredity, Lond. 12, 233–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lundqvist, A. (1964). The genetics of incompatibility. In Genetics Today, Proc. XI Int. Congr. Genet. 1963, pp. 637–647. London: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Mather, K. (1955). Polymorphism as an outcome of disruptive selection. Evolution, Lancaster, Pa. 9, 52–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mather, K. & De Winton, D. (1941). Adaptation and counter-adaptation of the breeding system in Primula. Ann. Bot., N.S. 5, 297–311.Google Scholar
Murty, G. S., Krishnamurthy, K. V. & Appa Rao, K. (1962). Cytogenetic behaviour of Nicotiana glauca var. lateritia W. 8400 in species hybrids and their back-crosses. Indian J. Genet. Pl. Breed. 22, 54–67.Google Scholar
Pandey, K. K. (1956). Mutations of self-incompatibility alleles in Trifolium pratense and T. repens. Genetics. 41, 327–343.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pandey, K. K. (1957). Genetics of self-incompatibility in Physalis ixocarpa Brot.—A new system. Am. J. Bot. 44, 879–887.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pandey, K. K. (1959). Mutation of the self-incompatibility gene (S) and pseudo-compatibility in angiosperms. Lloydia. 22, 222–234.Google Scholar
Pandey, K. K.(1960 a). Incompatibility in Abutilon ‘Hybridum’. Am. J. Bot. 47, 877–883.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pandey, K. K. (1960 b). Evolution of gametophytic and sporophytic systems of self-incompatibility in angiosperms. Evolution, Lancaster, Pa. 14, 98–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pandey, K. K. (1962 a). Interspecific incompatibility in Solanum species. Am. J. Bot. 49, 874–882.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pandey, K. K. (1962 b). A theory of S gene structure. Nature, Lond. 196, 236–238.Google Scholar
Pandey, K. K. (1962 C). Genetics of incompatibility behaviour in the Mexican Solanum species S. pinnatisectum. Z. VererbLehre 93, 378–388.Google Scholar
Pandey, K. K. (1963). Stigmatic secretion and bud-pollinations in self- and cross-incompatible plants. Naturwissenschaften. 50, 408–409.Google Scholar
Pandey, K. K. (1964). Elements of the S-gene complex. I. The SFI alleles in Nicotiana. Genet. Res. 5, 397–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pandey, K. K. (1967). Elements of the S-gene complex. II. Mutation and complementation at the SI locus in Nicotiana alata. Heredity, Lond. 22, 255–283.Google Scholar
Sheppard, P. M. (1964). Mimicry and its ecological aspects. In Genetics Today, Proc. XI Int. Congr. Genet. 1963, pp. 553–560. London: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Stebbins, G. L. (1950). Variation and Evolution in Plants. New York: Columbia Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Stebbins, G. L. (1957). Self-fertilization and population variability in the higher plants. Am. Nat. 91, 337–354.Google Scholar
Thoday, J. M. (1964). Effects of selection for genetic diversity. In Genetics Today, Proc. XI Int. Congr. Genet. 1963, pp. 553–560. London: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar