Skip to main content
Log in

Late-acting self-incompatibility in angiosperms

  • Published:
The Botanical Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In most self-incompatible (SI) plants, pollen tube growth in self-pollinated flowers is inhibited on the stigma or in the style. SI systems that operate in the ovary have been assumed to be extremely rare. Evidence from many plant species is presented to show that the SI barriers in the ovary, described here as late-acting SI systems, are quite common. The late-acting SI systems are divided into four categories: (1) ovarian inhibition of incompatible pollen tubes before the ovule is reached; (2) prefertilization inhibition in the ovule; (3) post-zygotic rejection of the embryo, and (4) ovular inhibition for which the cytological details have not been established.

Whether or not post-zygotic incompatibility systems can be distinguished from inbreeding depression depends upon the assumptions underlying the genetic models of self-incompatibility. However, four approaches are outlined that could distinguish between active uniform rejections that are presumably evolved responses to inbreeding depression and the passive, variable failures that are commonly understood to be expressions of typical inbreeding depression.

Possible advantages of late-acting SI include an extended period of time over which pollen genotypes may be evaluated by the maternal parent and greater flexibility in the choice of male parents.

Due to a paucity of data regarding the genetics and physiology of lateacting SI systems, little can be said at this time about the possible diversity of such systems of their evolutionary relationships with classical gametophytic and sporophytic SI.

An hypothesis for the operation of post-zygotic SI is described whereby maternal resources to developing embryos are terminated if the embryo (and/or endosperm) fall below a threshold level of heterosis. This hypothesis is a modification of one first proposed by Westoby and Rice in 1982 to explain variable maternal resource allocation to developing embryos.

Resumé

Pour la majorité des plantes autostériles, la croissance du tube pollinique, lorsque l’autopollinisation a lieu, est inhibée sur le stigmate ou dans le style. Il avait été supposé jusqu’ici que les mécanismes l’autostérilisation opérant dans l’ovaire étaient extrêmement rares. Des exemples provenant de plusieurs espèces végétales sont présentés ici pour montrer que les phénomènes d’autostérilisation au niveau de l’ovaire (désignés dans ce qui suit par l’expression “systèmes d’autostérilisation à action tardive”) sont en fait très communs. Les systèmes d’autostérilisation à action tardive son divisés en quatre catégories: (1) Inhibition ovarienne des tubes polliniques incompatibles avant que l’ovule ne soit atteint; (2) Inhibition dans l’ovule avant la fertilisation; (3) Rejet de l’embryon postzygotique; (4) Inhibition ovulaire (les détails cytologiques n’en ont pas encore été entièrement décrits).

Suivant les hypothèses sur lesquelles sont basés les différents modèles génétiques décrivant l’autostérilité, il est ou n’est pas possible de faire la distinction entre les systèmes d’incompatibilité post-zygotiques et la dégénérescence consanguine. Quatre différentes approches de la question sont proposées ici pour tenter de distinguer les rejets uniformes actifsqui sont présumés être des conséquences évolutionnaires de la dégénérescence consanguine—des défaillances variables passives, habituellement considérées comme l’expression caractéristique de la dégénérescence consanguine.

Deux avantages possibles des systèmes d’autostérilisation à action tardive pourraient être l’extension de la période durant laquelle les génotypes du pollen peuvent être évalués par le parent femelle, et une plus grande flexibilité dans le choix des parents mâles.

Vu la rareté des données génétiques et physiologiques en ce qui concerne les systèmes d’autostérilisation à action tardive, il est difficile d’estimer le degré de diversité de ces systèmes, ou leur corrélation évolutionnaire avec les systèmes classiques gamétophytiques et sporophytiques d’autostérilisation.

Une hypothèse décrivant le fonctionnement de l’autostérilisation postzygotique est exposée: les ressources maternelles cessent d’être fournies à l’embryon si le niveau d’hétérose de ce dernier (et/ou de l’endosperme) tombe en-dessous d’un seuil. Cette hypothèse est une modification de celle qui fut proposée en premier par Westoby et Rice en 1982 pour expliquer la variation dans l’attribution des ressources maternelles à l’embryon.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+
from $39.99 /Month
  • Starting from 10 chapters or articles per month
  • Access and download chapters and articles from more than 300k books and 2,500 journals
  • Cancel anytime
View plans

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Literature Cited

  • Arasu, N. T. 1970. Self-incompatibility inRibes. Euphytica19: 373–378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnes, D. K. &R. W. Cleveland. 1963. Genetic evidence for nonrandom fertilization in alfalfa as influenced by differential pollen tube growth. Crop Sci.3: 295–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bawa, K. S. &J. H. Beach. 1983. Self-incompatibility systems in the Rubiaceae of a tropical lowland wet forest. Amer. J. Bot.70: 1281–1288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • —,D. R. Perry &J. H. Beach. 1985. Reproductive biology of tropical lowland rain forest trees. I. Sexual systems and incompatibility mechanisms. Amer. J. Bot.72: 331–345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — &C. J. Webb. 1984. Flower, fruit and seed abortion in tropical forest trees: Implications for the evolution of paternal and maternal reproductive patterns. Amer. J. Bot.71: 736–751.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beach, J. H. &W. J. Kress. 1980. Sporophyte versus gametophyte: A note on the origin of self-incompatibility in flowering plants. Syst. Bot.5: 1–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bertin, R. I. 1982. Paternity and fruit production in trumpet creeper (Campsis radicans). Amer. Naturalist119: 694–709.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blinkenberg, C., H. Brix, M. Schaffalitzky de Muckadell &H. Vedel. 1958. Controlled pollinations inFagus. Silvae Genet.7: 116–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bookman, S. S. 1984. Evidence for selective fruit production inAsclepias. Evolution38: 72–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bouharmont, J. 1960. Recherches cytologiques sur la fructification et l’incompatibilité chezTheobroma cacao L. INEAC (Congo). Ser. Sci.89: 1–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brandham, P. E. &S. J. Owens. 1978. The genetic control of self-incompatibility in the genusGasteria (Liliaceae). Heredity40: 165–169.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brewbaker, J. L. 1957. Pollen cytology and self-incompatibility systems in plants. J. Hered.48: 271–277.

    Google Scholar 

  • — &D. D. Gorrez. 1967. Genetics of self-incompatibility in the monocot generaAnanas (pineapple) andGasteria. Amer. J. Bot.54: 611–616.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brink, R. A. &D. C. Cooper. 1938. Partial self-incompatibility inMedicago sativa. Proc. Nat. Acad. U.S.A.24: 497–499.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • ——. 1939. Somatoplastic sterility inMedicago sativa. Science90: 545–546.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Brock, R. D. 1954. Fertility inLilium hybrids. Heredity8: 409–420.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bubar, J. S. 1958. An association between variability in ovule development within ovaries and self-incompatibility inLotus (Leguminosae). Canad. J. Bot.36: 65–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1959. Differences between self-incompatibility and self-sterility. Nature183: 411–412.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — &R. K. Miri. 1965. Inheritance of self-incompatibility and brown keel tip inLotus corniculatus L. Nature205: 1035–1036.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Busbice, T. H., R. Y. Gurgis &H. B. Collins. 1975. Eifert of selection for self-fertility and self-sterility in alfalfa and related characters. Crop Sci.15: 471–475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Casper, B. B. &D. Wiens. 1981. Fixed rates of random ovule abortion inCryptantha flava (Boraginaceae) and its possible relation to seed dispersal. Ecology62: 866–869.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chan, H. T. 1981. Reproductive biology of some Malaysian Dipterocarps III. Breeding systems. Malaysian Forester44: 28–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Charlesworth, D. 1985. Distribution of dioecy and self-incompatibility in angiosperms. Pages 237–268in P. J. Greenwood, P. H. Harvey & M. Slatkin (eds.), Evolution: Essays in honour of John Maynard Smith. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Compton, R. H. 1913. Preliminary note on the inheritance of self-sterility inReseda odorata. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc.17: 7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, D. C. &R. A. Brink. 1940. Partial self-incompatibility and the collapse of fertile ovules as factors affecting seed formation in alfalfa. J. Agric. Res.60: 453–472.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cope, F. W. 1939. Some factors controlling the yield of young cacao—II. 8th Ann. Rep. Cacao Res. (1938), Trinidad, pages 4–15.

  • -. 1940. Studies in the mechanism of self-incompatibility in cacao—II. 9th Ann. Rep. Cacao Res. (1939), Trinidad, pages 19–23.

  • — 1958. Incompatibility inTheobroma cacao. Nature181: 279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — 1962a. The mechanism of pollen incompatibility inTheobroma cacao L. Heredity17: 157–182.

    Google Scholar 

  • — 1962b. The effects of incompatibility and compatibility on genotype proportions in populations ofTheobroma cacao L. Heredity17: 183–195.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crowe, L. K. 1971. The polygenic control of outbreeding inBorago officinalis. Heredity27: 111–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crumpacker, D. W. 1967. Genetic loads in maize (Zea mays L.) and other cross-fertilized plants and animals. Pages 306–414in T. Dobzhansky, M. K. Hecht & W. C. Steere (eds.), Evolutionary biology. Vol. 1. Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Darwin, C. 1876. Effects of cross and self fertilization in the vegetable kingdom. 2nd ed., 1878. New York, Appleton.

  • Dobrofsky, S. &W. F. Grant. 1980a. An investigation into the mechanism for reduced seed yield inLotus corniculatus. Theor. Appl. Genet.57: 157–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ——. 1980b. Electrophoretic evidence supporting self-incompatibility inLotus corniculatus. Canad. J. Bot.58: 712–716.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dobzhansky, T. 1970. Genetics of the evolutionary process. Columbia University Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dulberger, R. 1964. Flower dimorphism and self-incompatibility inNarcissus tazetta L. Evolution18: 361–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eigsti, O. J. 1937. Pollen tube behavior in self-fertile, self-sterile and interspecific pollinated Resedaceae. Amer. Naturalist71: 520–521.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fyfe, J. L. 1957. Relational incompatibility in diploid and tetraploid lucerne. Nature179: 591–592.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giles, W. F. 1949. The morphological aspects of self-sterility inLotus corniculatus. Ph.D. Thesis. University of Missouri, Columbia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Godley, E. J. 1966. Breeding systems in New Zealand plants 4. Self-sterility inPentachondra pumila. New Zealand J. Bot.4: 249–254.

    Google Scholar 

  • — &D. H. Smith. 1981. Breeding systems in New Zealand plants 5.Pseudowintera colorata (Winteraceae). New Zealand J. Bot.19: 151–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haldane, J. B. S. 1957. The cost of natural selection. J. Genet.55: 511–524.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jain, S. K. 1978. Breeding system inLimnanthes alba: Several alternative measures. Amer. J. Bot.65: 272–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Janzen, D. H. 1978. Seeding patterns of tropical trees. Pages 83–128in P. B. Tomlinson & M. H. Zimmerman (eds.), Tropical trees as living systems. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaynes, R. A. 1968. Self incompatibility and inbreeding depression in three laurel (Kalmia) species. Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci.93: 618–622.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kenrick, J., V. Kaui &R. B. Knox. 1984. Self incompatibility and the site of pollen tube arrest in Australian speciesof Acacia. Incompatibility Newsletter16: 3–4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knight, R. &H. H. Rogers. 1953. Sterility inTheobroma cacao L. Nature172: 164.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • ——. 1955. Incompatibility inTheobroma cacao. Heredity9: 69–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kostoff, D. 1930. Ontogeny, genetics, and cytology ofNicotiana hybrids. Genetica12: 33–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kress, W. J. 1981. Sibling competition and evolution of pollen unit, ovule number, and pollen vector in angiosperms. Syst. Bot.6: 101–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • —. 1983. Self-incompatibility in Central AmericanHeliconia. Evolution37: 735–744.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larsen, K. 1983. Incompatibility, pseudo-compatibility, and preferential fertilization inBeta vulgaris L.In D. L. Mulcahy & E. Ottaviano (eds.), Pollen: Biology and implications for plant breeding. Elsevier Biomédical, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, D. 1979. Sexual incompatibility in plants. Studies in Biology No. 110. Edward Arnold, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Linskens, H. F. 1959. Biochemical aspects of incompatibility. Recent Adv. Bot.2: 1500–1503.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lloyd, D. G. 1980. Sexual strategies in plants. I. An hypothesis of serial adjustment of maternal investment during one reproductive session. New Phytol.86: 69–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • —,C. J. Webb &R. B. Primack. 1980. Sexual strategies in plants. II. Data on the temporal determination of maternal investment. New Phytol.86: 81–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lundqvist, A. 1975. Complex self-incompatibility systems in angiosperms. Proc. Roy. Soc. London, Ser. B, Biol. Sci.188: 235–245.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mather, K. 1950. Genetical control of incompatibility in angiosperms and fungi. Pages 118–128in C. D. Darlington & K. Mather (eds.), Genes, plants, and people. George Allen & Unwin Ltd., London.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKay, J. W. 1942. Self-sterility in the Chinese chestnut (Castanea mollissima). Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. Proc.41: 156–160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meinke, D. W. 1982. Embryo-lethal mutants ofArabidopsis thaliana: Evidence for gametophytic expression of the mutant genes. Theor. Appl. Genet.63: 381–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — &I. M. Sussex. 1979. Embryo-lethal mutants ofArabidopsis thaliana: A model system for genetic analysis of plant embryo development. Developm. Biol.72: 50–61.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Miri, R. K. &J. S. Bubar. 1966. Self-incompatibility as an outcrossing mechanism in birdsfoot trefoil (Lotus corniculatus). Canad. J. Plant Sci.46: 411–418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mulcahy, D. L. &G. B. Mulcahy. 1983. Gametophytic self-incompatibility reexamined. Science220: 1247–1251.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • de Nettancourt, D. 1972. Self-incompatibility in basic and applied researches with higher plants. Genet. Agrar.26: 163–216.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1977. Incompatibility in angiosperms. Monographs on Theoretical and Applied Genetics 3. Springer-Verlag, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osterbye, U. 1975. Self-incompatibility inRanunculus acris L., genetic interpretation and evolutionary aspects. Hereditas80: 91–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pandey, K. K. 1959. Mutations of the self-incompatibility gene (S) and pseudo-compatibility in angiosperms. Lloydia22: 222–234.

    Google Scholar 

  • Philipp, M. &O. Schou. 1983. An unusual heteromorphic incompatibility system: Distyly, self-incompatibility, pollen load and fecundity inAnchusa officinalis (Boraginaceae). New Phytol.89: 693–703.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Price, M. V. &N. M. Waser. 1979. Pollen dispersal and optimal outcrossing inDelphinium nelsoni. Nature277: 294–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rao, C. V. 1952. The embryology ofMuntingia calabura L. J. Indian Bot. Soc.31: 87–101.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sayers, E. R. &R. P. Murphy. 1966. Seed set in alfalfa as related to pollen tube growth, fertilization frequency, and post-fertilization ovule abortion. Crop Sci.6: 365–368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schemske, D. W. 1983. Breeding system and habitat effects on fitness components in three neotropicalCostus (Zingiberaceae). Evolution37: 523–539.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, D. &T. O. Perry. 1964. Self-sterility in sweetgum. Forest Sci.10: 302–305.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schon, O. &M. Philipp. 1983. An unusual heteromorphic incompatibility system. II. Pollen tube growth and seed sets following compatible and incompatible crossing withinAnchusa officinalis L. Pages 219–227in D. L. Mulcahy & E. Ottaviano (eds.), Pollen: Biology and implications for plant breeding. Elsevier Biomedical, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sears, E. R. 1937. Cytological phenomena connected with self-sterility in the flowering plants. Genetics22: 130–181.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sheridan, W. F. &M. G. Neuffer. 1982. Maize developmental mutants, embryos unable to form leaf primordia. J. Heredity73: 318–329.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sorenson, F. 1969. Embryonic genetic load in coastal Douglas-fir,Pseudotsuga menziesii var.menziesii. Amer. Naturalist103: 389–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sparnaaij, L. D., Y. O. Kho &J. Baer. 1968. Investigations on seed production in tetraploid freesias. Euphytica17: 289–297.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sparrow, F. K. &N. L. Pearson. 1948. Pollen compatibility inAsclepias syriaca. J. Agric. Res.77: 187–199.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spiss, L. 1969. Laboratory methods of determining compatibility in birdsfoot trefoil (Lotus corniculatus). Genet. Polon.10: 114–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • — &D. J. Paolillo, Jr. 1969. Semi-vitro methods in the study of compatibility in birdsfoot trefoil (Lotus corniculatus L.). Crop Sci.9: 173–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stephenson, A. G. 1981. Flower and fruit abortion: Proximate causes and ultimate functions. Annual Rev. Ecol. Syst.12: 253–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • -& R. I. Bertin. 1983. Male competition, female choice, and sexual selection in plants. Pages 109–149in L. Real (ed.), Pollination biology. Academic Press.

  • Stout, A. B. &C. Chandler. 1933. Pollen-tube behavior inHemerocallis with special reference to incompatibilities. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club60: 397–416.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Straley, C. &B. Melton. 1970. Effect of temperature on self-fertility andin vitro pollen growth characteristics of selected alfalfa clones. Crop Sci.10: 326–329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taroda, N. &P. E. Gibbs. 1982. Floral biology and breeding system ofSterculia chicha St. Hil. (Sterculiaceae). New Phytol.90: 735–743.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wallace, B. 1970. Genetic load, its biological and conceptual aspects. Prentice-Hall, Inc., New Jersey.

    Google Scholar 

  • Westoby, M. &B. Rice. 1982. Evolution of the seed plants and inclusive fitness of plant tissues. Evolution36: 713–724.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, E. G., V. Kaul, J. L. Rouse &R. B. Knox. 1984. Apparent self-incompatibility inRhododendron ellipticum, R. championae andR. amamiense: A post-zygotic mechanism. Incompatibility Newsletter16: 10–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • —,R. B. Knox &J. L. Rouse. 1982. Pollination sub-systems distinguished by pollen tube arrest after incompatible interspecific crosses inRhododendron (Ericaceae). J. Cell Sci.53: 255–277.

    Google Scholar 

  • Willson, M. F. 1982. Sexual selection and dicliny in angiosperms. Amer. Naturalist119: 579–583.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — &N. Barley. 1983. Mate choice in plants: Tactics, mechanisms, and consequences. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wojciechowska, B. 1963. Embryological studies in the genusLotus. Part I. Fertilization and seed development following openxand self-pollination ofLotus corniculatus L. Genet. Polon.4: 53–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, S. 1977. Evolution and the genetics of populations. Vol. III. Experimental results and evolutionary deductions. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Seavey, S.R., Bawa, K.S. Late-acting self-incompatibility in angiosperms. Bot. Rev 52, 195–219 (1986). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02861001

Download citation

  • Issue date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02861001

Keywords