Cargando…

A comparative analysis of pollinator type and pollen ornamentation in the Araceae and the Arecaceae, two unrelated families of the monocots

BACKGROUND: The high diversity of ornamentation type in pollen grains of angiosperms has often been suggested to be linked to diversity in pollination systems. It is commonly stated that smooth pollen grains are associated with wind or water pollination while sculptured pollen grains are associated...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sannier, Julie, Baker, William J, Anstett, Marie-Charlotte, Nadot, Sophie
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2009
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2734846/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19624836
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1756-0500-2-145
_version_ 1782171225503563776
author Sannier, Julie
Baker, William J
Anstett, Marie-Charlotte
Nadot, Sophie
author_facet Sannier, Julie
Baker, William J
Anstett, Marie-Charlotte
Nadot, Sophie
author_sort Sannier, Julie
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The high diversity of ornamentation type in pollen grains of angiosperms has often been suggested to be linked to diversity in pollination systems. It is commonly stated that smooth pollen grains are associated with wind or water pollination while sculptured pollen grains are associated with biotic pollination. We tested the statistical significance of an association between pollen ornamentation and pollination system in two families of the monocotyledons, the Araceae and the Arecaceae, taking into account the phylogenetic framework. FINDINGS: Character optimization was carried out with the Maximum Parsimony method and two different methods of comparative analysis were used: the Concentrated-Change test and the Discrete method. The ancestral ornamentation in Araceae is foveolate/reticulate. It is probably the same in Arecaceae. The ancestral flowers of Araceae were pollinated by beetles while ancestral pollination in Arecaceae is equivocal. A correlation between ornamentation type and pollination was highlighted in Araceae although the results slightly differ depending on the method and the options chosen for performing the analyses. No correlation was found in palms. CONCLUSION: In this study, we show that the relationships between the ornamentation type and the pollination system depend on the family and hence vary among taxonomic groups. We also show that the method chosen may strongly influence the results.
format Text
id pubmed-2734846
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2009
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-27348462009-08-29 A comparative analysis of pollinator type and pollen ornamentation in the Araceae and the Arecaceae, two unrelated families of the monocots Sannier, Julie Baker, William J Anstett, Marie-Charlotte Nadot, Sophie BMC Res Notes Short Report BACKGROUND: The high diversity of ornamentation type in pollen grains of angiosperms has often been suggested to be linked to diversity in pollination systems. It is commonly stated that smooth pollen grains are associated with wind or water pollination while sculptured pollen grains are associated with biotic pollination. We tested the statistical significance of an association between pollen ornamentation and pollination system in two families of the monocotyledons, the Araceae and the Arecaceae, taking into account the phylogenetic framework. FINDINGS: Character optimization was carried out with the Maximum Parsimony method and two different methods of comparative analysis were used: the Concentrated-Change test and the Discrete method. The ancestral ornamentation in Araceae is foveolate/reticulate. It is probably the same in Arecaceae. The ancestral flowers of Araceae were pollinated by beetles while ancestral pollination in Arecaceae is equivocal. A correlation between ornamentation type and pollination was highlighted in Araceae although the results slightly differ depending on the method and the options chosen for performing the analyses. No correlation was found in palms. CONCLUSION: In this study, we show that the relationships between the ornamentation type and the pollination system depend on the family and hence vary among taxonomic groups. We also show that the method chosen may strongly influence the results. BioMed Central 2009-07-22 /pmc/articles/PMC2734846/ /pubmed/19624836 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1756-0500-2-145 Text en Copyright © 2009 Sannier et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Short Report
Sannier, Julie
Baker, William J
Anstett, Marie-Charlotte
Nadot, Sophie
A comparative analysis of pollinator type and pollen ornamentation in the Araceae and the Arecaceae, two unrelated families of the monocots
title A comparative analysis of pollinator type and pollen ornamentation in the Araceae and the Arecaceae, two unrelated families of the monocots
title_full A comparative analysis of pollinator type and pollen ornamentation in the Araceae and the Arecaceae, two unrelated families of the monocots
title_fullStr A comparative analysis of pollinator type and pollen ornamentation in the Araceae and the Arecaceae, two unrelated families of the monocots
title_full_unstemmed A comparative analysis of pollinator type and pollen ornamentation in the Araceae and the Arecaceae, two unrelated families of the monocots
title_short A comparative analysis of pollinator type and pollen ornamentation in the Araceae and the Arecaceae, two unrelated families of the monocots
title_sort comparative analysis of pollinator type and pollen ornamentation in the araceae and the arecaceae, two unrelated families of the monocots
topic Short Report
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2734846/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19624836
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1756-0500-2-145
work_keys_str_mv AT sannierjulie acomparativeanalysisofpollinatortypeandpollenornamentationinthearaceaeandthearecaceaetwounrelatedfamiliesofthemonocots
AT bakerwilliamj acomparativeanalysisofpollinatortypeandpollenornamentationinthearaceaeandthearecaceaetwounrelatedfamiliesofthemonocots
AT anstettmariecharlotte acomparativeanalysisofpollinatortypeandpollenornamentationinthearaceaeandthearecaceaetwounrelatedfamiliesofthemonocots
AT nadotsophie acomparativeanalysisofpollinatortypeandpollenornamentationinthearaceaeandthearecaceaetwounrelatedfamiliesofthemonocots
AT sannierjulie comparativeanalysisofpollinatortypeandpollenornamentationinthearaceaeandthearecaceaetwounrelatedfamiliesofthemonocots
AT bakerwilliamj comparativeanalysisofpollinatortypeandpollenornamentationinthearaceaeandthearecaceaetwounrelatedfamiliesofthemonocots
AT anstettmariecharlotte comparativeanalysisofpollinatortypeandpollenornamentationinthearaceaeandthearecaceaetwounrelatedfamiliesofthemonocots
AT nadotsophie comparativeanalysisofpollinatortypeandpollenornamentationinthearaceaeandthearecaceaetwounrelatedfamiliesofthemonocots