Am. J. Bot. Join the BSA
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Supplementary Data
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (3)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Mitchell, C. H.
Right arrow Articles by Diggle, P. K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Mitchell, C. H.
Right arrow Articles by Diggle, P. K.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Mitchell, C. H.
Right arrow Articles by Diggle, P. K.
(American Journal of Botany. 2005;92:1068-1076.)
© 2005 Botanical Society of America, Inc.

Structure and Development

The evolution of unisexual flowers: morphological and functional convergence results from diverse developmental transitions1

Caroline H. Mitchell and Pamela K. Diggle2

Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado 80309 USA

ABSTRACT

Unisexual flower morphology was examined within a phylogenetic context in order to identify developmental transitions associated with the multiple origins of dioecy in flowering plants. Historically, two categories of unisexual flowers have been recognized: type I flowers exhibit rudiments of the nonfunctional organ type, while type II flowers bear no vestigial sexual organs. Mapping of these flower types onto a composite phylogeny shows that type II morphology is homoplasious and has resulted from at least four distinct evolutionary developmental pathways. The historical assignment of unisexual flowers into only two morphological types has masked important developmental and evolutionary dynamics.

Key Words: character evolution • dioecy • flower development • heterochrony • homeosis • homoplasy • unisexual flowers




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Am. J. Bot.Home page
M. S. Kinney, J. T. Columbus, and E. A. Friar
Unisexual flower, spikelet, and inflorescence development in monoecious/dioecious Bouteloua dimorpha (Poaceae, Chloridoideae)
Am. J. Botany, February 1, 2008; 95(2): 123 - 132.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2005 by the Botanical Society of America, Inc.