Many Ways to Get Happy: Pollination Modes Of
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Pollinator Diversity and Reproductive Success of [I]Epipactis Helleborine[I]
Manuscript to be reviewed Pollinator diversity and reproductive success of Epipactis helleborine (L.) Crantz (Orchidaceae) in anthropogenic and natural habitats Agnieszka Rewicz Corresp., 1 , Radomir Jaskuła 2 , Tomasz Rewicz 3 , Grzegorz Tończyk 2 1 Department of Geobotany and Plant Ecology, University of Lodz, Łódź, Poland 2 Department of Invertebrate Zoology and Hydrobiology, University of Lodz, Łódź, Poland 3 Laboratory of Microscopic Imaging and Specialized Biological Techniques, University of Lodz, Łódź, Poland Corresponding Author: Agnieszka Rewicz Email address: [email protected] Background. Epipactis helleborine is an Eurasian orchid species which prefers woodland environments but it may also spontaneously and successfully colonise human-made artificial and disturbed habitats such as roadsides, town parks and gardens. It is suggested that orchids colonising anthropogenic habitats are characterised by a specific set of features (e.g.: large plant size, fast flower production). However, as it is not well known how pollinator diversity and reproductive success of E. helleborine differs in populations in anthropogenic habitats compared to populations from natural habitats, we wanted to compare pollinator diversity and reproductive success of this orchid species between natural and anthropogenic habitat types. Methods. Pollination biology, reproductive success and autogamy in populations of E. helleborine from anthropogenic (roadside) and natural (forest) habitats were compared. Eight populations (four natural and four human-disturbed ones) in two seasons were studied according to height of plants, length of inflorescences, as well as numbers of juvenile shoots, flowering shoots, flowers, and fruits. The number and diversity of insect pollinators were studied in one natural and two human-disturbed populations. Results. -
Guide to the Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia, and Georgia, Working Draft of 17 March 2004 -- LILIACEAE
Guide to the Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia, and Georgia, Working Draft of 17 March 2004 -- LILIACEAE LILIACEAE de Jussieu 1789 (Lily Family) (also see AGAVACEAE, ALLIACEAE, ALSTROEMERIACEAE, AMARYLLIDACEAE, ASPARAGACEAE, COLCHICACEAE, HEMEROCALLIDACEAE, HOSTACEAE, HYACINTHACEAE, HYPOXIDACEAE, MELANTHIACEAE, NARTHECIACEAE, RUSCACEAE, SMILACACEAE, THEMIDACEAE, TOFIELDIACEAE) As here interpreted narrowly, the Liliaceae constitutes about 11 genera and 550 species, of the Northern Hemisphere. There has been much recent investigation and re-interpretation of evidence regarding the upper-level taxonomy of the Liliales, with strong suggestions that the broad Liliaceae recognized by Cronquist (1981) is artificial and polyphyletic. Cronquist (1993) himself concurs, at least to a degree: "we still await a comprehensive reorganization of the lilies into several families more comparable to other recognized families of angiosperms." Dahlgren & Clifford (1982) and Dahlgren, Clifford, & Yeo (1985) synthesized an early phase in the modern revolution of monocot taxonomy. Since then, additional research, especially molecular (Duvall et al. 1993, Chase et al. 1993, Bogler & Simpson 1995, and many others), has strongly validated the general lines (and many details) of Dahlgren's arrangement. The most recent synthesis (Kubitzki 1998a) is followed as the basis for familial and generic taxonomy of the lilies and their relatives (see summary below). References: Angiosperm Phylogeny Group (1998, 2003); Tamura in Kubitzki (1998a). Our “liliaceous” genera (members of orders placed in the Lilianae) are therefore divided as shown below, largely following Kubitzki (1998a) and some more recent molecular analyses. ALISMATALES TOFIELDIACEAE: Pleea, Tofieldia. LILIALES ALSTROEMERIACEAE: Alstroemeria COLCHICACEAE: Colchicum, Uvularia. LILIACEAE: Clintonia, Erythronium, Lilium, Medeola, Prosartes, Streptopus, Tricyrtis, Tulipa. MELANTHIACEAE: Amianthium, Anticlea, Chamaelirium, Helonias, Melanthium, Schoenocaulon, Stenanthium, Veratrum, Toxicoscordion, Trillium, Xerophyllum, Zigadenus. -
The Vascular Plants of Massachusetts
The Vascular Plants of Massachusetts: The Vascular Plants of Massachusetts: A County Checklist • First Revision Melissa Dow Cullina, Bryan Connolly, Bruce Sorrie and Paul Somers Somers Bruce Sorrie and Paul Connolly, Bryan Cullina, Melissa Dow Revision • First A County Checklist Plants of Massachusetts: Vascular The A County Checklist First Revision Melissa Dow Cullina, Bryan Connolly, Bruce Sorrie and Paul Somers Massachusetts Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program The Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program (NHESP), part of the Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife, is one of the programs forming the Natural Heritage network. NHESP is responsible for the conservation and protection of hundreds of species that are not hunted, fished, trapped, or commercially harvested in the state. The Program's highest priority is protecting the 176 species of vertebrate and invertebrate animals and 259 species of native plants that are officially listed as Endangered, Threatened or of Special Concern in Massachusetts. Endangered species conservation in Massachusetts depends on you! A major source of funding for the protection of rare and endangered species comes from voluntary donations on state income tax forms. Contributions go to the Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Fund, which provides a portion of the operating budget for the Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program. NHESP protects rare species through biological inventory, -
Epipactis Tremolsii Seed Diversity in Two Close but Extremely Different Populations: Just a Case of Intraspecific Variability?
plants Article Epipactis tremolsii Seed Diversity in Two Close but Extremely Different Populations: Just a Case of Intraspecific Variability? 1 1, , 1 2 Antonio De Agostini , Pierluigi Cortis * y , Annalena Cogoni , Roberta Gargiulo and Giuseppe Fenu 1 1 Department of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Cagliari, Via Sant’Ignazio da Laconi 13, 09123 Cagliari, CA, Italy; [email protected] (A.D.A.); [email protected] (A.C.); [email protected] (G.F.) 2 Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew Richmond, Surrey TW9 3DS, UK; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Shared first co-authorship. y Received: 9 November 2020; Accepted: 20 November 2020; Published: 23 November 2020 Abstract: Analysis of the seed morphology is a widely used approach in ecological and taxonomic studies. In this context, intraspecific variability with respect to seed morphology (size, weight, and density) was assessed in two close Epipactis tremolsii Pau. populations sharing the same ecological conditions, except for the soil pollution distinguishing one of them. Larger and heavier seeds were found in plants growing on the heavy metal polluted site, while no differences in seed density were detected between seeds produced by plants growing on the contaminated and the control site. Moreover, seed coats and embryos varying together in their dimensions were described in the control population, while coats varying in their size independently from embryos were described in plants growing on the polluted site. Seeds from the two studied populations significantly differed in several parameters suggesting that intraspecific seed variability occurred in the case study. Keywords: Epipactis; intraspecific variability; seed ecology; seed morphometry; heavy metals 1. -
Review Article Conservation Status of the Family Orchidaceae in Spain Based on European, National, and Regional Catalogues of Protected Species
Hind ile Scientific Volume 2018, Article ID 7958689, 18 pages https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/7958689 Hindawi Review Article Conservation Status of the Family Orchidaceae in Spain Based on European, National, and Regional Catalogues of Protected Species Daniel de la Torre Llorente© Biotechnology-Plant Biology Department, Higher Technical School of Agronomic, Food and Biosystems Engineering, Universidad Politecnica de Madrid, 28140 Madrid, Spain Correspondence should be addressed to Daniel de la Torre Llorente; [email protected] Received 22 June 2017; Accepted 28 December 2017; Published 30 January 2018 Academic Editor: Antonio Amorim Copyright © 2018 Daniel de la Torre Llorente. Tis is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Tis report reviews the European, National, and Regional catalogues of protected species, focusing specifcally on the Orchidaceae family to determine which species seem to be well-protected and where they are protected. Moreover, this examination highlights which species appear to be underprotected and therefore need to be included in some catalogues of protection or be catalogued under some category of protection. Te national and regional catalogues that should be implemented are shown, as well as what species should be included within them. Tis report should be a helpful guideline for environmental policies about orchids conservation in Spain, at least at the regional and national level. Around 76% of the Spanish orchid fora are listed with any fgure of protection or included in any red list, either nationally (about 12-17%) or regionally (72%). -
Articles & Book Reviews
Newsletter of the Colorado Native Plant Society ARTICLES & BOOK REVIEWS Marr Steinkamp Research: Pollination Biology of the Stream Orchid Alpine Cushion Plants in New Zealand Interview with Barbara Fahey, Native Plant Master® Program Founder Conservation Corner: White River Beardtongue How Lupines Talk to Bees Volume 38, No. 2 Summer 2014 Aquilegia: Newsletter of the Colorado Native Plant Society Dedicated to furthering the knowledge, appreciation, and conservation of native plants and habitats of Colorado through education, stewardship, and advocacy Volume 38 Number 2 Summer 2014 ISSN 2161-7317 (Online) - ISSN 2162-0865 (Print) Inside this issue News & Announcements................................................................................................ 3 Field Trips........................................................................................................................6 Articles Marr/Steinkamp Research: Pollination Biology of Epipactis gigantea........................9 How Lupines Talk to Bees...........................................................................................11 The Other Down Under: Exploring Alpine Cushion Plants in New Zealand...........14 The Native Plant Master® Program: An Interview with Barbara Fahey.....................16 Conservation Corner: White River Beardtongue......................................................... 13 Book & Media Reviews, Song........................................................................................19 Calendar...................................................................................................................... -
The Red Data List of Irish Plants
The Red Data List of Irish Plants The risks that species face are each very different, however, as a guide to the susceptibility of a given species, an agreed set of categories has been established internationally, and these are used to determine the potential risk that a species could become extinct. These categories are:- CRITICALLY ENDANGERED or CR - Species that are declining at a fast rate, and face imminent risk of extinction. ENDANGERED or E - Species that are declining, or grow in habitats likely to be disturbed, 'developed' or facing an ongoing degradation. VULNERABLE or V - Species that are currently not endangered, but would be extremely vulnerable if their habitats are disturbed in the future. There are seven species of plant that require immediate intervention (CR) if we are to save them from joining the fate of 11 other species that are now known to be extinct in Ireland. A number of these are already extinct in the Republic, and are not therefore legally protected under the 1999 Flora Protection Act. In the list below, 188 species of plant are listed, of which 64 are flowering plants, 4 ferns, 14 mosses, 4 liverworts, 1 lichen and 2 algae. Protected=1999 Flora Protection Order; (protected)= formerly protected by 1987 Order; {protected}= formerly protected by 1980 Order; (NI)= protected in Northern Ireland only. EXTINCT (9) Pheasant's-eye Adonis annua -- Corncockle Agrostemma githago Cogal Corn Chamomile Anthemis arvensis Fíogadán goirt Purple Spurge Euphorbia peplis Spuirse dhearg Sea Stock Matthiola sinuata Tonóg chladaigh -
Handbook a “Improving the Availability of Data and Information
Improving the availability of data and information on species, habitats and sites Focus Area A Handbook on the application of existing scientific approaches, methods, tools and knowledge for a better implementation of the Birds and Habitat Directives Environment FOCUS AREA A IMPROVING THE AVAILABILITY OF DATA AND i INFORMATION ON SPECIES, HABITATS AND SITES Imprint Disclaimer This document has been prepared for the European Commis- sion. The information and views set out in the handbook are Citation those of the authors only and do not necessarily reflect the Schmidt, A.M. & Van der Sluis, T. (2021). E-BIND Handbook (Part A): Improving the availability of data and official opinion of the Commission. The Commission does not information on species, habitats and sites. Wageningen Environmental Research/ Ecologic Institute /Milieu Ltd. guarantee the accuracy of the data included. The Commission Wageningen, The Netherlands. or any person acting on the Commission’s behalf cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information Authors contained therein. Lead authors: This handbook has been prepared under a contract with the Anne Schmidt, Chris van Swaay (Monitoring of species and habitats within and beyond Natura 2000 sites) European Commission, in cooperation with relevant stakehold- Sander Mücher, Gerard Hazeu (Remote sensing techniques for the monitoring of Natura 2000 sites) ers. (EU Service contract Nr. 07.027740/2018/783031/ENV.D.3 Anne Schmidt, Chris van Swaay, Rene Henkens, Peter Verweij (Access to data and information) for evidence-based improvements in the Birds and Habitat Kris Decleer, Rienk-Jan Bijlsma (Approaches and tools for effective restoration measures for species and habitats) directives (BHD) implementation: systematic review and meta- Theo van der Sluis, Rob Jongman (Green Infrastructure and network coherence) analysis). -
GENOME EVOLUTION in MONOCOTS a Dissertation
GENOME EVOLUTION IN MONOCOTS A Dissertation Presented to The Faculty of the Graduate School At the University of Missouri In Partial Fulfillment Of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy By Kate L. Hertweck Dr. J. Chris Pires, Dissertation Advisor JULY 2011 The undersigned, appointed by the dean of the Graduate School, have examined the dissertation entitled GENOME EVOLUTION IN MONOCOTS Presented by Kate L. Hertweck A candidate for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy And hereby certify that, in their opinion, it is worthy of acceptance. Dr. J. Chris Pires Dr. Lori Eggert Dr. Candace Galen Dr. Rose‐Marie Muzika ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I am indebted to many people for their assistance during the course of my graduate education. I would not have derived such a keen understanding of the learning process without the tutelage of Dr. Sandi Abell. Members of the Pires lab provided prolific support in improving lab techniques, computational analysis, greenhouse maintenance, and writing support. Team Monocot, including Dr. Mike Kinney, Dr. Roxi Steele, and Erica Wheeler were particularly helpful, but other lab members working on Brassicaceae (Dr. Zhiyong Xiong, Dr. Maqsood Rehman, Pat Edger, Tatiana Arias, Dustin Mayfield) all provided vital support as well. I am also grateful for the support of a high school student, Cady Anderson, and an undergraduate, Tori Docktor, for their assistance in laboratory procedures. Many people, scientist and otherwise, helped with field collections: Dr. Travis Columbus, Hester Bell, Doug and Judy McGoon, Julie Ketner, Katy Klymus, and William Alexander. Many thanks to Barb Sonderman for taking care of my greenhouse collection of many odd plants brought back from the field. -
“Dynamic Speciation Processes in the Mediterranean Orchid Genus Ophrys L
“DYNAMIC SPECIATION PROCESSES IN THE MEDITERRANEAN ORCHID GENUS OPHRYS L. (ORCHIDACEAE)” Tesi di Dottorato in Biologia Avanzata, XXIV ciclo (Indirizzo Sistematica Molecolare) Universitá degli Studi di Napoli Federico II Facoltá di Scienze Matematiche, Fisiche e Naturali Dipartimento di Biologia Strutturale e Funzionale 1st supervisor: Prof. Salvatore Cozzolino 2nd supervisor: Prof. Serena Aceto PhD student: Dott. Hendrik Breitkopf 1 Cover picture: Pseudo-copulation of a Colletes cunicularius male on a flower of Ophrys exaltata ssp. archipelagi (Marina di Lesina, Italy. H. Breitkopf, 2011). 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS GENERAL INTRODUCTION CHAPTER 1: MULTI-LOCUS NUCLEAR GENE PHYLOGENY OF THE SEXUALLY DECEPTIVE ORCHID GENUS OPHRYS L. (ORCHIDACEAE) CHAPTER 2: ANALYSIS OF VARIATION AND SPECIATION IN THE OPHRYS SPHEGODES SPECIES COMPLEX CHAPTER 3: FLORAL ISOLATION IS THE MAIN REPRODUCTIVE BARRIER AMONG CLOSELY RELATED SEXUALLY DECEPTIVE ORCHIDS CHAPTER 4: SPECIATION BY DISTURBANCE: A POPULATION STUDY OF CENTRAL ITALIAN OPHRYS SPHEGODES LINEAGES CONTRIBUTION OF CO-AUTHORS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 3 GENERAL INTRODUCTION ORCHIDS With more than 22.000 accepted species in 880 genera (Pridgeon et al. 1999), the family of the Orchidaceae is the largest family of angiosperm plants. Recently discovered fossils document their existence for at least 15 Ma. The last common ancestor of all orchids has been estimated to exist about 80 Ma ago (Ramirez et al. 2007, Gustafsson et al. 2010). Orchids are cosmopolitan, distributed on all continents and a great variety of habitats, ranging from deserts and swamps to arctic regions. Two large groups can be distinguished: Epiphytic and epilithic orchids attach themselves with aerial roots to trees or stones, mostly halfway between the ground and the upper canopy where they absorb water through the velamen of their roots. -
WETLAND PLANTS – Full Species List (English) RECORDING FORM
WETLAND PLANTS – full species list (English) RECORDING FORM Surveyor Name(s) Pond name Date e.g. John Smith (if known) Square: 4 fig grid reference Pond: 8 fig grid ref e.g. SP1243 (see your map) e.g. SP 1235 4325 (see your map) METHOD: wetland plants (full species list) survey Survey a single Focal Pond in each 1km square Aim: To assess pond quality and conservation value using plants, by recording all wetland plant species present within the pond’s outer boundary. How: Identify the outer boundary of the pond. This is the ‘line’ marking the pond’s highest yearly water levels (usually in early spring). It will probably not be the current water level of the pond, but should be evident from the extent of wetland vegetation (for example a ring of rushes growing at the pond’s outer edge), or other clues such as water-line marks on tree trunks or stones. Within the outer boundary, search all the dry and shallow areas of the pond that are accessible. Survey deeper areas with a net or grapnel hook. Record wetland plants found by crossing through the names on this sheet. You don’t need to record terrestrial species. For each species record its approximate abundance as a percentage of the pond’s surface area. Where few plants are present, record as ‘<1%’. If you are not completely confident in your species identification put’?’ by the species name. If you are really unsure put ‘??’. After your survey please enter the results online: www.freshwaterhabitats.org.uk/projects/waternet/ Aquatic plants (submerged-leaved species) Stonewort, Bristly (Chara hispida) Bistort, Amphibious (Persicaria amphibia) Arrowhead (Sagittaria sagittifolia) Stonewort, Clustered (Tolypella glomerata) Crystalwort, Channelled (Riccia canaliculata) Arrowhead, Canadian (Sagittaria rigida) Stonewort, Common (Chara vulgaris) Crystalwort, Lizard (Riccia bifurca) Arrowhead, Narrow-leaved (Sagittaria subulata) Stonewort, Convergent (Chara connivens) Duckweed , non-native sp. -
Phytogeographical Analysis and Ecological Factors of the Distribution of Orchidaceae Taxa in the Western Carpathians (Local Study)
plants Article Phytogeographical Analysis and Ecological Factors of the Distribution of Orchidaceae Taxa in the Western Carpathians (Local study) Lukáš Wittlinger and Lucia Petrikoviˇcová * Department of Geography and Regional Development, Faculty of Natural Sciences, Constantine the Philosopher University in Nitra, 94974 Nitra, Slovakia; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +421-907-3441-04 Abstract: In the years 2018–2020, we carried out large-scale mapping in the Western Carpathians with a focus on determining the biodiversity of taxa of the family Orchidaceae using field biogeographical research. We evaluated the research using phytogeographic analysis with an emphasis on selected ecological environmental factors (substrate: ecological land unit value, soil reaction (pH), terrain: slope (◦), flow and hydrogeological productivity (m2.s−1) and average annual amounts of global radiation (kWh.m–2). A total of 19 species were found in the area, of which the majority were Cephalenthera longifolia, Cephalenthera damasonium and Anacamptis morio. Rare findings included Epipactis muelleri, Epipactis leptochila and Limodorum abortivum. We determined the ecological demands of the abiotic environment of individual species by means of a functional analysis of communities. The research confirmed that most of the orchids that were studied occurred in acidified, calcified and basophil locations. From the location of the distribution of individual populations, it is clear that they are generally arranged compactly and occasionally scattered, which results in ecological and environmental diversity. During the research, we identified 129 localities with the occurrence of Citation: Wittlinger, L.; Petrikoviˇcová, L. Phytogeographical Analysis and 19 species and subspecies of orchids. We identify the main factors that threaten them and propose Ecological Factors of the Distribution specific measures to protect vulnerable populations.