title: EVOLUTIONARY IMPLICATIONS OF SELF-COMPATIBILITY AND REPRODUCTIVE FITNESS IN THE APOMICTIC RANUNCULUS AURICOMUS POLYPLOID COMPLEX (RANUNCULACEAE).
abstract: Uniparental reproduction has often been regarded as advantageous for colonization. In pseudogamous a pomicts, reproduction via single individuals requires self-pollination and consequently self-compatibility (SC) for production of viable seeds. SC and reproductive fitness have been studied in diploid and polyploid taxa of the Ranunculus auricomus complex via pollinator exclusion tests, assessment of seed set, and germination rates. Reproductive fitness of sexuals exceeds that of apomicts and of F(1) hybrids but may fluctuate more strongly between years than is the case in apomicts. Diploid sexual taxa and also their F(1) hybrids are completely self-incompatible (SI). Auto-polyploid sexual cytotypes are also predominantly SI, which may have restricted their range expansion. The observed breakdown of SI in the rather widespread allohexaploid apomicts may be explained by initial partial SC inherited from semi-self-compatible ancestors and strong selection for SC genotypes. It is concluded that higher reproductive fitness of sexuals may help to maintain sexual populations when cross-pollination is available, whereas SC in apomicts may be advantageous in temporally and spatially unstable environments and also for colonization events. Results suggest that SC in connection with pseudogamous apomixis is an important factor for the observed distribution pattern of geographical parthenogenesis.
authors.affiliation: Department of Systematic and Evolutionary Botany, University of Vienna, Rennweg 14, A-1030 Vienna, Austria.
authors.forename: Elvira
authors.initials: E
authors.lastname: Hörandl
references.citation: Mol Ecol. 1999 Dec;8(12):2127-32
references.pmid: 10632863
references.citation: Evolution. 2000 Apr;54(2):337-51
references.pmid: 10937212
references.citation: Trends Ecol Evol. 2005 Sep;20(9):495-502
references.pmid: 16701426
references.citation: Bot J Linn Soc. 1989 Apr;99(4):365-376
references.pmid: 32327810
references.citation: Evolution. 1967 Dec;21(4):853-856
references.pmid: 28563079
references.citation: Evolution. 1985 Jan;39(1):24-40
references.pmid: 28563655
references.citation: Am J Bot. 2007 Sep;94(9):1527-33
references.pmid: 21636519
references.citation: Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2003 Jun 29;358(1434):1071-84
references.pmid: 12831473
references.citation: Plant Ecol Divers. 2008 Nov 1;1(2):309-320
references.pmid: 20936092
references.citation: New Phytol. 2004 Jun;162(3):803-811
references.pmid: 33873757
references.citation: Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2005 Aug;36(2):305-27
references.pmid: 15955512
references.citation: New Phytol. 2007;173(2):231-49
references.pmid: 17204072
references.citation: Mol Ecol. 2006 Apr;15(4):897-910
references.pmid: 16599955
references.citation: Heredity (Edinb). 1999 Dec;83 ( Pt 6):707-14
references.pmid: 10651915
references.citation: Mol Biotechnol. 2003 Oct;25(2):149-84
references.pmid: 14526125
references.citation: Evolution. 1998 Jun;52(3):657-668
references.pmid: 28565251
references.citation: Am J Bot. 2004 May;91(5):656-63
references.pmid: 21653420
references.citation: Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2003 Jun 29;358(1434):1095-103
references.pmid: 12831475
references.citation: New Phytol. 2005 Nov;168(2):475-86
references.pmid: 16219086
references.citation: Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2003 Jun 29;358(1434):1113-21
references.pmid: 12831477
references.citation: Genetics. 2006 Sep;174(1):387-98
references.pmid: 16783024
references.citation: Experientia Suppl. 1987;55:197-217
references.pmid: 2961597
references.citation: New Phytol. 2006;171(1):223-36
references.pmid: 16771996
references.citation: New Phytol. 2006;171(3):525-38
references.pmid: 16866956