Hybridization and self-compatibility in Celtis: AFLP analysis of controlled crosses

Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science

Volumn 132, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 368-373

  Whittemore, Alan T ^a   Townsend, Alden M ^a  

^a United States National Arboretum   (United States)

Author keywords

Cannabaceae; Hackberry; Interspecific hybrids; Sugarberry; Urban tree breeding

Indexed keywords

CANNABACEAE; CELTIS; CELTIS BUNGEANA; CELTIS KORAIENSIS; CELTIS LAEVIGATA; CELTIS OCCIDENTALIS; CELTIS SINENSIS; CELTIS TENUIFOLIA;

EID: 34249090308     PISSN: 00031062     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.21273/jashs.132.3.368     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Boonpragob, K. 1972. Crossing within the genus Celtis (Ulmaceae). J. Tennessee Acad. Sci. 47(2):54 (abstr.).
2. Dirr, M.A. 1998. Manual of woody landscape plants. 5th ed. Stipes Publishing, Champaign, Ill.
3. Elias, T.S. 1970. The genera of Ulmaceae in the southeastern United States. J. Arnold Arboretum 51:18-40.
4. Fang, J.-G., C.-C. Chao, R.J. Henny, and J.-J. Chen. 2005. DNA methylation polymorphisms in somaclonal-derived cultivars of ornamental aroids. HortScience 40:1105 (abstr.).
5. Fernald, M.L. 1950. Manual of botany. 8th ed. Van Nostrand, New York.
6. Krajicek, J.E. 1965. Hackberry (Celtis occidentalis L.), p. 140-143. In: H.A. Fowells (ed.). Silvics of forest trees of the United States. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agriculture Handbook 271. Washington, D.C.
7. Krajicek, J.E. and R.D. Williams. 1990. Celtis occidentalis, p. 262-265. In: R.M. Burns and B.H. Honkala (eds.), Silvics of North America, Vol 2. Hardwoods. Agriculture Handbook 654. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Washington, D.C.
8. Mabberley, D.J. 1997. The plant-book. 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press, New York.
9. Marquard, R.D. 1992. Pollen tube growth in Carya and temporal influence of pollen deposition on fertilization success in pecan. J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 117:328-331.
10. Mitchell, R.S. 1988. Platanaceae through Myricaceae of New York State. Contributions to a flora of New York State VI. New York State Museum Bul. No. 464. State Education Department, Albany, N.Y.
11. Pooler, M.R., G.H. Riedel, S.E. Bentz, and A.M. Townsend. 2002. Molecular markers used to verify interspecific hybridization between hemlock (Tsuga) species. J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 127:623-627.
12. Song, B.-H., X.-Q. Wang, F.-Z. Li, and D.-Y. Hong. 2001. Further evidence for paraphylly of the Celtidaceae from the chloroplast gene matK. Plant Syst. Evol. 228:107-115.
13. Sytsma, K.J., J. Morawetz, J.C. Pires, M. Nepokroeff, E. Conti, M. Zjhra, J.C. Hall, and M.W. Chase. 2002. Urticalean rosids: circumscription, rosid ancestry, and phylogenetics based on rbcL, trnL-F, ndhF sequences. Amer. J. Bot. 89(9):1531-1546.
14. Vos, P., R. Hogers, M. Bleeker, M. Reijans, T. van de Lee, M. Hornes, A. Frijters, J. Pot, J. Peleman, M. Kuiper, and M. Zabeau. 1995. AFLP: a new technique for DNA fingerprinting. Nucleic Acids Res. 23:4407-4414.
15. Whittemore, A.T. 2005. Genetic structure, lack of introgression, and taxonomic status in the Celtis laevigata-C. reticulata complex (Celtidaceae). Syst. Bot. 30:809-817.
16. Wiegrefe, S.J., K.J. Sytsma, and R.P. Guries. 1998. The Ulmaceae, one family or two? Evidence from chloroplast DNA restriction site mapping. Plant Syst. Evol. 210:249-270.
17. Wofford, B.E. and E.W. Chester. 2002. Guide to the trees, shrubs, and woody vines of Tennessee. University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville.