HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Search for Related Content

Galloway's paper elegantly examines the effect of parental environments on offspring traits. It is unusual in that it tests paternal environmental effects in addition to the typical maternal effects. Interestingly, interactions between the parental environments had a greater effect on the offspring phenotype than either environment independently. These parental environmental effects were genetically variable in the two populations studied. The results suggest that paternal environmental effects may have a substantial, and under-appreciated, role in ecology and evolution. (see p. 832)

Vine-like pteridosperm reconstructed

Krings et al. bring a fossil plant to life in a well-supported and documented reconstruction of the Permocarboniferous seed fern Pseudomariopteris busquetii that grew as a vine. Their reconstruction also may represent a generalized model for the growth habit of mariopteroid seed ferns. The vine P. busquetii climbed with hooks developed from apical extensions of pinna axes. Plants may have supported each other in dense stands or thickets. Their work advances our understanding of the deep past as a time when organisms were alive and functioned within their specialized ecology, here the coal-swamp forest ecosystem. (see p. 767)

Fast pollen tubes

Pasonen et al. address an interesting question in an economically important species that is technically difficult to work with, Betula pendula. Do pollen donors with the fastest growing pollen tubes sire the best offspring? Applying innovative methods (microfilm machine to view seed embryos) and observing progeny 30 and 85 days after planting, they conclude that pollen tube growth rate (measured by pollen tube length after 12 hours) is not a predictor of progeny performance (measured in terms of seed and early seedling characteristics). (see p. 854)

Breeding true in the monastery

Fairbanks and Rytting address several of the most contentiously debated issues about Gregor Mendel's contributions to genetics. Although Mendel is the acknowledged founder of the field, some praise him as a brilliant scientist, others are critical of his methods, and a few claim he was a fraud, cooking data to support his theories. Were his data "too good" to be true; were his experiments fictitious; did he support or oppose Darwin? Applying botanical principles and carefully using historical evidence, the authors review Mendel's work and conclude that he did not fabricate his data, his description of his experiments is literal, and he neither strongly supported nor opposed Darwin. (see p. 737)

This Article Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Search for Related Content