Correlated evolution of fruit size and sexual expression in andromonoecious Solanum sections Acanthophora and Lasiocarpa (Solanaceae)

American Journal of Botany

Volumn 94, Issue 10, 2007, Pages 1706-1715

  Miller, Jill S ^a   Diggle, Pamela K ^b  

^a AMHERST COLLEGE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO   (United States)

Author keywords

Acanthophora; Andromonoecy; CAIC; Flower size; Fruit mass; Fruit size; Independent contrasts; Lasiocarpa; PDAP; Phylogeny; Solanaceae; Solanum

Indexed keywords

DICOTYLEDON; EVOLUTION; HYPOTHESIS TESTING; PHYLOGENETICS; RESOURCE ALLOCATION;

ACANTHOPHORA; MAGNOLIOPHYTA; SOLANACEAE; SOLANUM;

EID: 35348946340     PISSN: 00029122     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3732/ajb.94.10.1706     Document Type: Article

References (84)

1. ANDERSON, G. J., AND D. E. SYMON. 1989. Functional dioecy and andromonoecy in Solanum. Evolution 43: 204-219.
2. ANDERSON, I. A., AND J. W. BUSCH. 2006. Relaxed pollinator-mediated selection weakens floral integration in self-compatible taxa of Leavenworthia (Brassicaceae). American Journal of Botany 93: 860-867.
3. ARMBRUSTER, W. S., V. S. DI STILLIO, J. D. TUXILL, T. C. FLORES, AND J. L. VELÁSQUEZ RUNK. 1999. Covariance and decoupling of floral and vegetative traits in nine neotropical plants: a re-evaluation of Berg's correlation-pleiades concept. American Journal of Botany 86: 39-55.
4. ARMBRUSTER, W. S., C. P. H. MULDER, B. G. BALDWIN, S. KALISZ, B. WESSA, AND H. NUTE. 2002. Comparative analysis of late floral development and mating-system evolution in tribe Collinsieae (Scrophulariaceae s.l.). American Journal of Botany 89: 37-49.
5. ASHMAN, T.-L. 1999. Quantitative genetics of floral traits in a gynodioecious wild strawberry, Fragaria virginiana: implications for the independent evolution of female and hermaphrodite floral phenotypes. Heredity 83: 733-741.
6. ASHMAN, T.-L., AND C. J. MAJETIC. 2006. Genetic constraints on floral evolution: a review and evaluation of patterns. Heredity 96: 343-352.
7. BALDET, P., M. HERNOULD, F. LAPORTE, F. MOUNET, D. JUST, A. MOURAS, C. CHEVALIER, AND C. ROTHAN. 2006. The expression of cell proliferation-related genes in early developing flowers is affected by a fruit load reduction in tomato fruits. Journal of Experimental Botany 57: 961-970.
8. BELL, G. 1985. On the function of flowers. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, B, Biological Sciences 224: 223-265.
9. BERLYN, G. P., AND J. P. MIKSCHE. 1976. Botanical microtechnique and cytochemistry. Iowa State University Press, Ames, Iowa, USA.
10. BERTIN, N. 2004. Analysis of the tomato fruit growth response to temperature and plant fruit load in relation to cell division, cell expansion and DNA endoreduplication. Annals of Botany 95: 439-447.
11. BERTIN, R. I. 1982. The evolution and maintenance of andromonoecy. Evolutionary Theory 6: 25-32.
12. BOHNER, J., AND F. BANGERTH. 1988. Effects of fruit set sequence and defoliation on cell number, cell size and hormone levels of tomato fruit (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) within a truss. Plant Growth Regulation 7: 141-155.
13. BOHS, L. 2004. A chloroplast DNA phylogeny of Solanum section Lasiocarpa. Systematic Botany 29: 177-187.
14. BRUNEAU, A., E. E. DICKSON, AND S. KNAPP. 1995. Congruence of chloroplast DNA restriction site characters with morphological and isozyme data in Solanum sect. Lasiocarpa. Canadian Journal of Botany 73: 1151-1167.
15. CAMPBELL, D. R. 1989. Inflorescence size: a test of the male function hypothesis. American Journal of Botany 76: 730-738.
16. CARUSO, C. M. 2004. The quantitative genetics of floral trait variation in Lobelia: potential constraints on adaptive evolution. Evolution 58: 732-740.
17. CONG, B., J. LIU, AND S. D. TANKSLEY. 2002. Natural alleles at a tomato fruit size quantitative trait locus differ by heterochronic regulatory mutations. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 99: 13606-13611.
18. CONG, B., AND S. D. TANKSLEY. 2006. fw2.2 and cell cycle control in developing tomato fruit: a possible example of gene co-option in the evolution of a novel organ. Plant Molecular Biology 62: 867-880.
19. CONNER, J. K., AND S. RUSH. 1996. Effects of flower size and number on pollinator visitation to wild radish, Raphanus raphanistrum. Oecologia 105: 509-516.
20. CONNOLLY, B. A., AND G. J. ANDERSON. 2003. Functional significance of the androecium in staminate and hermaphroditic flowers of Solanum carolinense (Solanaceae). Plant Systematics and Evolution 240: 235-243.
21. DIAZ-URIARTE, R., AND T. GARLAND JR. 1998. Effects of branch length errors on the performance of phylogenetically independent contrasts. Systematic Biology 47: 654-672.
22. DIGGLE, P. K. 1993. Developmental plasticity, genetic variation, and the evolution of andromonoecy in Solanum hirtum (Solanaceae). American Journal of Botany 80: 967-973.
23. DIGGLE, P. K. 1994. The expression of andromonoecy in Solanum hirtum (Solanaceae): phenotypic plasticity and ontogenetic contingency. American Journal of Botany 81: 1354-1365.
24. DIGGLE, P. K. 1995. Architectural effects and the interpretation of patterns of fruit and seed development. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 26: 531-552.
25. DIGGLE, P. K., AND J. S. MILLER. 2004. Architectural effects mimic floral sexual dimorphism in Solanum (Solanaceae). American Journal of Botany 91: 2130-2040.
26. EHRLEN, J. 1991. Why do plants produce surplus flowers? A reserve-ovary model. American Naturalist 138: 918-933.
27. ELLE, E. 1996. Reproductive trade-offs in genetically distinct clones of Vaccinium macrocarpon, the American cranberry. Oecologia 107: 61-70.
28. ELLE, E. 1998. The quantitative genetics of sex allocation in the andromonoecious perennial, Solanum carolinense (L.) [sic]. Heredity 80: 481-488.
29. ELLE, E. 1999. Sex allocation and reproductive success in the andromonoecious perennial Solanum carolinense (Solanaceae). I. Female success. American Journal of Botany 86: 278-286.
30. ELLE, E., AND T. R. MEAGHER. 2000. Sex allocation and reproductive success in the andromonoecious perennial Solanum carolinense (Solanaceae). II. Paternity and functional gender. American Naturalist 156: 622-636.
31. EMMS, S. K. 1993. Andromonoecy in Ziadenus paniculatus (Liliaceae): spatial and temporal patterns of sex allocation. American Journal of Botany 80: 914-923.
32. EMMS, S. K. 1996. Temporal patterns of seed set and decelerating fitness returns on female allocation in Zigadenus paniculatus (Liliaceae), an andromonoecious lily. American Journal of Botany 83: 304-315.
33. EMMS, S. K., D. A. STRATTON, AND A. A. SNOW. 1997. The effect of inflorescence size on male fitness: experimental tests in the andromonoecious lily, Zigadenus paniculatus. Evolution 51: 1481-1489.
34. FRARY, A., T. C. NESBITT, A. FRARY, S. GRANDILLO, E. VAN DER KNAAP, B. CONG, J. LIU, J. MELLER, R. ELBER, K. B. ALPERT, AND S. D. TANKSLEY. 2000. fw2.2: a quantitative trait locus key to the evolution of tomato fruit size. Science 289: 85-88.
35. FRECKLETON, R. P. 2000. Phylogenetic tests of ecological and evolutionary hypotheses: checking for phylogenetic independence. Functional Ecology 14: 129-134.
36. GALEN, C., AND M. E. A. NEWPORT. 1987. Bumble bee behavior and selection on flower size in the sky pilot, Polemonium viscosum. Oecologia 74: 20-23.
37. GARLAND, T. JR., P. H. HARVEY, AND A. R. IVES. 1992. Procedures for the analysis of comparative data using phylogenetically independent contrasts. Systematic Biology 41: 18-32.
38. GILLASPY, G., H. BEN-DAVID, AND W. GRUISEM. 1993. Fruits: a developmental perspective. Plant Cell 5: 1439-1451.
39. GRANDILLO, S., AND S. D. TANKSLEY. 1996. QTL analysis of horticultural traits differentiating the cultivated tomato from the closely related species Lycopersicon pimpinellifolium. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 92: 935-951.
40. HARDER, L. D., AND S. C. H. BARRETT. 1996. Pollen dispersal and mating patterns in animal-pollinated plants. In D. G. Lloyd and S. C. H. Barrett [eds.], Floral biology: studies on floral evolution in animal-pollinated plants, 140-190. Chapman and Hall, New York, New York, USA.
41. HARDER, L. D., S. C. H. BARRETT, AND W. W. COLE. 2000. The mating consequences of sexual segregation within inflorescences of flowering plants. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, B, Biological Sciences 267: 315-320.
42. HARDER, L. D., AND J. D. THOMSON. 1989. Evolutionary options for maximizing pollen dispersal of animal pollinated plants. American Naturalist 133: 323-344.
43. HARVEY, P. H., AND M. D. PAGEL. 1991. The comparative method in evolutionary biology. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
44. JANZEN, D. H. 1977. A note on optimal mate selection in plants. American Naturalist 111: 365-371.
45. JOUBÉS, J., T-H. PHAN, D. JUST, C. ROTHAN, C. BERGOUNIOUX, P. RAYMOND, AND C. CHEVALIER. 1999. Molecular and biochemical characterization of the involvement of cyclin-dependent kinase A during early development of tomato fruit. Plant Physiology 121: 867-869.
46. KNAPP, S. 2002. Tobacco to tomatoes: a phylogenetic perspective on fruit diversity in the Solanaceae. Journal of Experimental Botany 53: 2001-2022.
47. LEE, T. D. 1988. Patterns of fruit and seed production. In J. Lovett-Doust and L. Lovett-Doust [eds.], Plant reproductive ecology: patterns and strategies, 179-202. Oxford, University Press, New York, USA.
48. LEVIN, R. A., N. R. MYERS, AND L. BOHS. 2006. Phylogenetic relationships among the "spiny solanums" (Solanum subgenus Leptostemonum). American Journal of Botany 93: 157-169.
49. LEVIN, R. A., K. WATSON, AND L. BOHS. 2005. A four-gene study of evolutionary relationships in Solanum section Acanthophora. American Journal of Botany 92: 603-612.
50. LLOYD, D. G. 1979. Parental strategies in angiosperms. New Zealand Journal of Botany 17: 595-606.
51. LLOYD, D. G. 1980. Sexual strategies in plants. I. An hypothesis of serial adjustment of maternal investment during one reproductive session. New Phytologist 86: 69-79.
52. LLOYD, D. G., AND K. S. BAWA. 1984. Modification of gender of seed plants in varying conditions. Evolutionary Biology 17: 255-338.
53. MADDISON, W. P., AND D. R. MADDISON. 2005. Mesquite: a modular system for evolutionary analysis, version 1.06. Website http://mesquiteproject.org [accessed 10 August, 2007].
54. MAY, P. G., AND E. E. SPEARS JR. 1988. Andromonoecy and variation in phenotypic gender of Passiflora incarnata (Passifloraceae). American Journal of Botany 75: 1830-1841.
55. MIDFORD, P. E., T. GARLAND JR., AND W. P. MADDISON. 2003. PDAP: PDTREE package for Mesquite, version 1.00. http://mesquiteproject.org/pdap_mesquite/ [accessed 10 August, 2007].
56. MILLER, J. S., AND P. K. DIGGLE. 2003. Diversification of andromonoecy in Solanum section Lasiocarpa (Solanaceae): the roles of phenotypic plasticity and architecture. American Journal of Botany 90: 707-715.
57. MILLER, R. H. 1969. A morphological study of Solanum mammosum and its mammiform fruit. Botanical Gazette 130: 230-237.
58. NEE, M. 1979. A revision of Solanum section Acanthophora. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, USA.
59. NESBITT, T. C., AND S. D. TANKSLEY. 2001. fw2.2 directly affects the size of developing tomato fruit, with secondary effects on fruit number and photosynthate distribution. Plant Physiology 127: 575-583.
60. PODOLSKY, R. D. 1993. Evolution of a flower dimorphism: how effective is pollen dispersal by "male" flowers? Ecology 74: 2255-2260.
61. POSADA, D., AND K. A. CRANDALL. 1998. Modeltest: testing the model of DNA substitution. Bioinformatics 14: 817-818.
62. PRICE, T. 1997. Correlated evolution and independent contrasts. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, B, Biological Sciences 352: 519-529.
63. PRIMACK, R. B. 1987. Relationships among flowers, fruits, and seeds. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 18: 409-430.
64. PRIMACK, R. B., AND D. G. LLOYD. 1980. Andromonoecy in the New Zealand montane shrub manuka, Leptospermum scoparium (Myrtaceae). American Journal of Botany 67: 361-368.
65. PURVIS, A., AND A. RAMBAUT. 1995. Comparative analysis by independent contrasts (CAIC): an Apple Macintosh application for analysing comparative data. Computer Applications in Biological Sciences 11: 247-251.
66. RAMBAUT, A. 2002. Se-Al: sequence alignment editor, version 2.0. Website http://evolve.zoo.ox.ac.uk/ [accessed 10 August, 2007].
67. RUIZ ZAPATA, T., AND M. T. KALIN ARROYO. 1978. Plant reproductive ecology of a secondary deciduous tropical forest in Venezuela. Biotropica 10: 221-230.
68. SAS INSTITUTE. 2002. JMP, version 5.0.1a. SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina, USA.
69. SOKAL, R. R., AND F. J. ROHLF. 1995. Biometry, 3rd ed. Freeman, New York, New York, USA.
70. SOLOMON, B. P. 1985. Environmentally influenced changes in sex expression in an andromonoecious plant. Ecology 66: 1321-1332.
71. SOLOMON, B. P. 1986. Sexual allocation and andromonoecy: resource investment in male and hermaphrodite flowers of Solanum carolinense (Solanaceae). American Journal of Botany 73: 1215-1221.
72. SPALIK, K. 1991. On the evolution of andromonoecy and 'overproduction' of flowers: a resource allocation model. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 42: 325-336.
73. SPUJT, R. J. 1994. A systematic treatment of fruit types. New York Botanic Garden, Bronx, New York.
74. STANTON, M. L., AND R. E. PRESTON. Ecological consequences and phenotypic correlates of petal size variation in wild radish, Raphanus sativus. American Journal of Botany 75: 528-539.
75. STEPHENSON, A. G. 1981. Flower and fruit abortion: proximate causes and ultimate functions. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 12: 253-279.
76. SUTHERLAND, S. 1986. Floral sex ratios, fruit-set, and resource allocation in plants. Ecology 67: 991-1001.
77. SWOFFORD, D. L. 2002. PAUP*: phylogenetic analysis using parsimony (* and other methods), version 4. Sinauer, Sunderland, Massachusetts, USA.
78. TANKSLEY, S. D. 2004. The genetic, developmental, and molecular bases of fruit size and shape variation in tomato. Plant Cell 16: S181-S189.
79. VALLEJO-MARÍN, M., AND M. D. RAUSHER. 2007. The role of male flowers in andromonoecious species: energetic costs and siring success in Solanum carolinense L. Evolution 61: 404-412.
80. VELIATH, J. A., AND A. C. FERGUSON. 1972. The effect of deblossoming on fruit size, yield, and earliness in tomato. Journal of Horticultural Science 7: 278-279.
81. WHALEN, M. D., AND D. E. COSTICH. 1986. Andromonoecy in Solanum. In W. G. D'Arcy [ed.], Solanaceae: biology and systematics, 284-302. Columbia University Press, New York, New York, USA.
82. WHALEN, M. D., D. E. COSTICH, AND C. B. HEISER. 1981. Taxonomy of Solanum section Lasiocarpa. Gentes Herbarium 12: 41-129.
83. WYATT, R. 1982. Inflorescence architecture: how flower number, arrangement, and phenology affect pollination and fruit-set. American Journal of Botany 69: 585-594.
84. YAMPOLSKY, E., AND H. YAMPOLSKY. 1922. Distribution of sex forms in the phanerogamic flora. Bibliographia Genetica 3: 1-62.