Abstract
The Western Carpathians are traditionally recognized as one of the hotspots of temperate European biodiversity. The polyploid and apomictic group of Cotoneaster integerrimus s.l. is supposed to be particularly variable there, and this is also mirrored by taxonomy. We therefore examined the ploidal and reproductive pattern of C. integerrimus s.l. and its close relative Cotoneaster tomentosus in the Western Carpathians and compared it to that in the Bohemian Massif. Using flow cytometry, we detected tetraploid (468 individuals, 100 populations) and pentaploid (35 individuals, 11 populations) cytotypes, and eight additional mixed populations. The pentaploid cytotype was found exclusively in C. tomentosus, which only occurs in the Western Carpathians. A further flow cytometric seed screen (1114 seeds) revealed facultative apomixis (10.1% of sexual progeny) of tetraploid C. integerrimus s.l., whereas the pentaploid C. tomentosus was almost obligately apomictic. In addition, 3.8% of sexual progeny was formed with the contribution of an unreduced female gamete. Moreover, apomixis in tetraploids was further structured into distinct subtypes: pseudogamy (77.2%), autonomous apomixis (3.7%) and haploid parthenogenesis (0.3%). There were no significant differences in the proportions of sexual and asexual seeds between both species and geographic regions. Our comparative dataset from the Western Alps also included sexual diploids. For this reason, greater ploidal and reproductive variation may be expected in that region. The Western Carpathians therefore do not represent a centre of cytotype and reproductive variation of C. integerrimus s.l., and facultative apomixis is a reproductive strategy that predominates in both the Western Carpathians and the Bohemian Massif.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Baranec T (1992) Cotoneaster Medicus. In: Bertová L (ed) Flóra Slovenska IV/3. Veda, Bratislava, pp 452–462
Baranec T, Eliáš P Jr. (2004) Taxonómia a chorológia rodu Cotoneaster Medicus na území Nízkych Tatier. Prír Nízkych Tatier 1:101–106
Bartha D (2009) Cotoneaster Medik. - Madárbirs. In: Király G (ed) Új magyar füvészkönyv. Aggteleki Nemzeti Park Ig, Jósvafő, p 229
Bartish IV, Hylmö B, Nybom H (2001) RAPD analysis of interspecific relationships in presumably apomictic Cotoneaster species. Euphytica 120:273–280. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1017585600386
Bölöni J (2012) Madárbirsek (Cotoneaster spp.). In: Bartha D (ed) Magyarország ritka fa és cserjefajainak atlasza. Budapest, Kossuth Kiadó, pp 154–167
Browicz K (1968) Cotoneaster Medicus. In: Tutin TG, Heywood VH, Burges NA et al. (eds) Flora Europaea, vol. 2. University Press, Cambridge, pp 72–73
Campbell CS, Greene CW, Dickinson TA (1991) Reproductive biology in subfam. Maloideae (Rosaceae). Syst Bot 16:333–349. https://doi.org/10.2307/2419284
Chrtek J Jr, Tonková M, Mráz P et al (2007) Morphological and allozyme diversity in the Hieracium nigrescens group (Compositae) in the Sudety Mountains and the Western Carpathians. Bot J Linn Soc 153:287–300. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8339.2007.00606.x
De Wet JMJ (1968) Diploid-tetraploid-haploid cycles and the origin of variability in Dichanthium agamospecies. Evolution (New York) 22:394–397. https://doi.org/10.2307/2406537
Dickinson TA, Lo E, Talent N (2007) Polyploidy, reproductive biology, and Rosaceae: understanding evolution and making classifications. Pl Syst Evol 266:59–78. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00606-007-0541-2
Dickoré WB, Kasperek G (2010) Species of Cotoneaster (Rosaceae, Maloideae) indigenous to, naturalising or commonly cultivated in Central Europe. Willdenowia 40:13–46. https://doi.org/10.3372/wi.40.40102
Dobeš C, Lückl A, Hülber K, Paule J (2013) Prospects and limits of the flow cytometric seed screen–insights from Potentilla sensu lato (Potentilleae, Rosaceae). New Phytol 198:605–616. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.12149
Doležel J, Greilhuber J, Suda J (2007) Flow cytometry with plants: analysis of genes, chromosomes and genomes. Wiley, Weinheim
Ďurišová L, Žabka M, Baranec T (2015) Population and reproductive biology of Cotoneaster matrensis Domokos. In: Brindza J, Klymenko S (eds) AGROBIODIVERSITY for improving nutrition, health and life quality. Part I. Slovak University of Agriculture in Nitra, Nitra, pp 134–138
Favarger C (1969) Notes de caryologie alpine V. Bull Soc Neuchâtel Sci Nat 92:13–30. https://doi.org/10.5169/seals-88992
Fryer J, Hylmo B (1994) The native British Cotoneaster—Great Orme Berry—renamed. Watsonia 20:61–63
Fryer J, Hylmö B (2009) Cotoneasters: a comprehensive guide to shrubs for flowers, fruit, and foliage. Timber Press, London
Gladkova VN (1968) Karyological studies on the genera Crataegus L. and Cotoneaster Medik. (Maloideae) as related to their taxonomy. Bot Zhurnal (Moscow & Leningrad) 53:1263–1273
Goranova V (2007) Chromosome numbers of some shrubs and trees from the Bulgarian flora. Phytol Balcan 13:383–386
Hair JB (1956) Subsexual reproduction in Agropyron. Heredity 10:129–160. https://doi.org/10.1038/hdy.1956.15
Hajrudinović A, Frajman B, Schönswetter P et al (2015a) Towards a better understanding of polyploid Sorbus (Rosaceae) from Bosnia and Herzegovina (Balkan Peninsula), including description of a novel, tetraploid apomictic species. Bot J Linn Soc 178:670–685. https://doi.org/10.1111/boj.12289
Hajrudinović A, Siljak-Yakovlev S, Brown SC et al (2015b) When sexual meets apomict: genome size, ploidy level and reproductive mode variation of Sorbus aria s.l. and S. austriaca (Rosaceae) in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Ann Bot (Oxford) 116:301–312. https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcv093
Hammer Ø, Harper DAT, Ryan PD (2001) Paleontological statistics software: package for education and data analysis. Palaeontol Electronica 4:1–9
Hjelmquist H (1962) The embryo sac development of some Cotoneaster species. Bot Not 115:208–236
Hojsgaard D, Klatt S, Baier R et al (2014) Taxonomy and biogeography of apomixis in angiosperms and associated biodiversity characteristics. Crit Rev Pl Sci 33:414–427. https://doi.org/10.1080/07352689.2014.898488
Hörandl E, Cosendai A-C, Temsch EM (2008) Understanding the geographic distributions of apomictic plants: a case for a pluralistic approach. Pl Ecol Diversity 1:309–320. https://doi.org/10.1080/17550870802351175
Hörandl E, Dobeš C, Suda J et al (2011) Apomixis is not prevalent in subnival to nival plants of the European Alps. Ann Bot (Oxford) 108:381–390. https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcr142
Hrabětová-Uhrová A (1961) Skalník černoplodý (Cotoneaster nigra (Wahlb.) Fries) a jeho rozšíření na Moravě. Sborn Klubu Přír Brno 33:5–24
Hrabětová-Uhrová A (1962) Beitrag zur Taxonomie und Verbreitung der Gattung Cotoneaster in der Tschechoslowakei. Práce Brněnske Zákl Českoslov Akad Věd 34:197–248
Jankun A, Kovanda M (1986) Apomixis in Sorbus sudetica (Embryological studies in Sorbus 1). Preslia 58:7–19
Jedrzejczyk I, Sliwinska E (2010) Leaves and seeds as materials for flow cytometric estimation of the genome size of 11 Rosaceae woody species containing DNA-staining inhibitors. J Bot 2010:1–9. https://doi.org/10.1155/2010/930895
Kalkman C (1988) The phylogeny of the Rosaceae. Bot J Linn Soc 98:37–59. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8339.1988.tb01693.x
Kaplan Z (2012) Flora and phytogeography of the Czech Republic. Preslia 84:505–573. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63181-3_3
Kissling WD, Lord JM, Schnittler M (2006) Agamospermous seed production of the invasive tussock grass Nardus stricta L. (Poaceae) in New Zealand—evidence from pollination experiments. Flora-morphology. Distrib Funct Ecol Pl 201:144–151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.flora.2005.05.003
Kliment J, Turis P, Janišová M (2016) Taxa of vascular plants endemic to the Carpathian Mts. Preslia 88:19–76
Kolarčik V, Kocová V, Vašková D (2018) Flow cytometric seed screen data are consistent with models of chromosome inheritance in asymmetrically compensating allopolyploids. Cytometry Part A 93A:737–748. https://doi.org/10.1002/cyto.a.23511
Kovanda M (1992) Cotoneaster Med.—skalník. In: Hejný S, Slavík B (eds) Květena České republiky III. Academia, Praha, pp 485–487
Krahulcová A, Krahulec F (2000) Offspring diversity in Hieracium subgen. Pilosella (Asteraceae): new cytotypes from hybridization experiments and from open pollination. Fragm Flor Geobot 45:239–255
Krahulec F, Krahulcová A, Rosenbaumová R, Plačková I (2011) Production of polyhaploids by facultatively apomictic Pilosella can result in formation of new genotypes via genome doubling. Preslia 83:471–490
Kron P, Husband BC (2009) Hybridization and the reproductive pathways mediating gene flow between native Malus coronaria and domestic apple, M. domestica. Botany 87:864–874. https://doi.org/10.1139/B09-045
Kroon GH (1975) Polyploidy in Cotoneaster II. Acta Bot Neerl 24:417–420. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1438-8677.1975.tb01032.x
Krügel T (1990) Chromosome number in some species of the genus Cotoneaster and in the intergeneric hybrid × Sorbocotoneaster pozdnjakovii (Rosaceae). Bot Zhurnal (Moscow & Leningrad) 75:437
Kurtto A, Sennikov AN, Lampinen R (2013) Cotoneaster Medicus. In: Atlas Florae Europaeae. Distribution of vascular plants in Europe, vol 16 Rosaceae (Cydonia to Prunus, exl. Sorbus). The Committee for Mapping the Flora of Europe & Societas Biologica Fennica Vanamo, Helsinki, pp 49–56
Kutzelnigg H (1994) Cotoneaster. In: Conert HJ, Jäger EJ, Kadereit JW et al (eds) Illustrierte Flora von Mitteleuropa, Band IV, Teil 2B. Blackwell Wissenschafts-Verlag, Berlin, Wien, pp 405–420
Lauber K, Wagner G (1996) Cotoneáster. Flora Helvetica. Paul Haupt, Bern, pp 560–561
Lepší M, Vít P, Lepší P et al (2008) Sorbus milensis, a new hybridogenous species from northwestern Bohemia. Preslia 80:229–244
Lepší M, Vít P, Lepší P et al (2009) Sorbus portae-bohemicae and Sorbus albensis, two new endemic apomictic species recognized based on a revision of Sorbus bohemica. Preslia 81:63–89
Li M, Chen S, Zhou R et al (2017) Molecular evidence for natural hybridization between Cotoneaster dielsianus and C. glaucophyllus. Frontiers Pl Sci 8:704. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2017.00704
Loureiro J, Rodriguez E, Doležel J, Santos C (2006) Flow cytometric and microscopic analysis of the effect of tannic acid on plant nuclei and estimation of DNA content. Ann Bot (Oxford) 98:515–527. https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcl140
Löve Á (1969) IOPB chromosome number reports XXII. Taxon 18:433–442
Löve Á (1975) IOPB chromosome number reports L. Taxon 24:671–678
Löve Á (1983) IOPB chromosome number reports LXXX. Taxon 32:504–511
Macková L, Vít P, Ďurišová Ľ et al (2017) Hybridization success is largely limited to homoploid Prunus hybrids: a multidisciplinary approach. Pl Syst Evol 303:481–495. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00606-016-1385-4
Macková L, Vít P, Urfus T (2018) Crop-to-wild hybridization in cherries—empirical evidence from Prunus fruticosa. Evol Applic 11:1748–1759. https://doi.org/10.1111/eva.12677
Mahmutović-Dizdarević I, Hajrudinović A, Siljak-Yakovlev S et al (2015) Cytotypes and reproductive modes of Cotoneaster integerrimus (Rosaceae) from Bosnia and Herzegovina: preliminary results. Abstract in: Cytometrie 2015: 19e Congrès annuel de l’association Française de Cytométrie, Antibes, France, pp 18–20
Majeský Ľ, Krahulec F, Vašut RJ (2017) How apomictic taxa are treated in current taxonomy: a review. Taxon 66:1017–1040. https://doi.org/10.12705/665.3
Matzk F, Meister A, Schubert I (2000) An efficient screen for reproductive pathways using mature seeds of monocots and dicots. Pl J 21:97–108. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-313x.2000.00647.x
Měsíček J, Javůrková-Jarolímová V (1992) Malaceae. In: Měsíček J, Javůrková-Jarolímová V (eds) List of chromosome numbers of the Czech vascular plants. Academia, Praha, p 56
Meusel H, Jäger EJ, Weinert E (1965) Cotoneaster. In: Meusel H, Jäger EJ, Weinert E (eds) Vergleichende Chorologie der zentraleuropaischen Flora, Karten. VEB Gustav Fischer Verlag, Jena, p 208
Mogie M (1992) The evolution of asexual reproduction in plants. Chapman & Hall, London
Mráz P, Barabas D, Lengyelová L et al (2016) Vascular plant endemism in the Western Carpathians: spatial patterns, environmental correlates and taxon traits. Biol J Linn Soc 119:630–648. https://doi.org/10.1111/bij.12792
Murín A, Májovský J (1992) Karyological study of the Slovak Flora XXV. Acta Fac Rerum Nat Univ Comen Bot 39:53–57
Nogler GA (1984) Genetics of apospory in apomictic Ranunculus auricomus. V. Conclusion. Bot Helv 94:411–422. https://doi.org/10.5169/seals-65890
R Core Team (2017) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R foundation for statistical computing, Vienna. Available at: http://www.R-project.org. Accessed 10 Oct 2019
Robertson KR, Phipps JB, Rohrer JR, Smith PG (1991) A synopsis of genera in Maloideae (Rosaceae). Syst Bot 16:376–394. https://doi.org/10.2307/2419287
Rohrer JR, Robertson KR, Phipps JB (1991) Variation in structure among fruits of Maloideae (Rosaceae). Amer J Bot 78:1617–1635. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1537-2197.1991.tb14528.x
Ronikier M (2011) Biogeography of high-mountain plants in the Carpathians: an emerging phylogeographical perspective. Taxon 60:373–389. https://doi.org/10.1002/tax.602008
Rothleutner JJ, Friddle MW, Contreras RN (2016) Ploidy levels, relative genome sizes, and base pair composition in Cotoneaster. J Amer Soc Hortic Sci 141:457–466. https://doi.org/10.21273/JASHS03776-16
Šarhanová P, Vašut RJ, Dančák M et al (2012) New insights into the variability of reproduction modes in European populations of Rubus subgen. Rubus: how sexual are polyploid brambles? Sexual Pl Reprod 25:319–335. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00497-012-0200-9
Savidan Y, Pernès J (1982) Diploid-tetraploid-dihaploid cycles and the evolution of Panicum maximum Jacq. Evolution (New York) 36:596–600. https://doi.org/10.2307/2408104
Sax HJ (1954) Polyploidy and apomixis in Cotoneaster. J Arnold Arbor 35:334–365
Schinkel CCF, Kirchheimer B, Dellinger AS et al (2016) Correlations of polyploidy and apomixis with elevation and associated environmental gradients in an alpine plant. AoB Plants 8:64. https://doi.org/10.1093/aobpla/plw064
Scott RJ (2007) Polyspermy in apomictic Crataegus: yes and no. New Phytol 173:227–229. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2006.01958.x
Sennikov A (2010) Book review—Fryer, J. and Hylmö, B. Cotoneasters: a comprehensive guide to shrubs for flowers, fruit, and foliage. Nordic J Bot 28:509–512. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-1051.2009.00639.x
Štorchová H, Chrtek J Jr., Bartish IV et al (2002) Genetic variation in agamospermous taxa of Hieracium sect. Alpina (Compositae) in the Tatry Mts. (Slovakia). Pl Syst Evol 235:1–17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00606-002-0219-8
Talent N, Dickinson TA (2007) Endosperm formation in aposporous Crataegus (Rosaceae, Spiraeoideae, tribe Pyreae): parallels to Ranunculaceae and Poaceae. New Phytol 173:231–249. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2006.01918.x
Uhrinová V, Zozomová-Lihová J, Bernátová D et al (2017) Origin and genetic differentiation of pink-flowered Sorbus hybrids in the Western Carpathians. Ann Bot (Oxford) 120:271–284. https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcx013
Vašut RJ, Majeský Ľ (2015) Taraxacum pudicum, a new apomictic microspecies of T. section Erythrosperma (Asteraceae) from Central Europe. Phytotaxa 227:243–252. https://doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.227.3.3
Veselý P, Bureš P, Šmarda P, Pavlíček T (2012) Genome size and DNA base composition of geophytes: the mirror of phenology and ecology? Ann Bot (Oxford) 109:65–75. https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcr267
Whitton J, Sears CJ, Baack EJ, Otto SP (2008) The dynamic nature of apomixis in the angiosperms. Int J Pl Sci 169:169–182. https://doi.org/10.1086/523369
Wild J, Kaplan Z, Danihelka J et al (2019) Plant distribution data for the Czech Republic integrated in the Pladias database. Preslia 91:1–2. https://doi.org/10.23855/preslia.2019.001
Zeilinga AE (1964) Polyploidy in Cotoneaster. Bot Not 117:262–278
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank Pavol Eliáš jr., Michael Macek, Jan Smyčka, Jiří Velebil, Alžběta Böhmová, Monika Pavlíková, Romana Urfusová, Kristýna Šemberová, Matěj Kolář, Filip Kolář and Jindřich Chrtek for their assistance in the field and laboratory. Jan Pinc kindly consulted our statistics. We are grateful to Vlasta Jarolímová for her generous help with chromosome counting. Frederick Rooks kindly improved the English of our manuscript. We are also grateful to Lucie Červená, who helped us prepare the map. This study was supported by Charles University Research Centre programme No. 204069 and Grant VEGA 1/0047/19.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Handling Editor: Patrik Mraz.
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Contribution to “Biogeography of the Carpathians”.
Electronic supplementary material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Information on Electronic Supplementary Material
Information on Electronic Supplementary Material
The accompanying Electronic Supplementary Material includes seven pdf files containing detailed information on published chromosome counts, sampling information, illustrative histograms of simultaneous FCM showing detected ploidy levels and reproductive modes, additional graphs and a summary table of all detected ratios between the ploidy of the embryo and that of the endosperm in Cotoneaster taxa under study.
Online Resource 1. Published chromosome counts of Cotoneaster integerrimus s.l. and C. tomentosus in Europe.
Online Resource 2. Study sites and sampling details used for the estimation of ploidy level (FCM) and analysis of reproductive modes (FCSS). Mixed populations are labelled by asterisks.
Online Resource 3. Histogram of a simultaneous flow-cytometric analysis of Cotoneaster leaves showing three detected ploidy levels (2x – diploid C. integerrimus s.l., 4x – tetraploid C. integerrimus s.l. and 5x – pentaploid C. tomentosus; internal standard – Carex acutiformis; 2C = 800 Mpb).
Online Resource 4. Representative histograms of flow-cytometric analyses of Cotoneaster seeds showing six prevailing reproductive modes defined by the ratio between the ploidy of the embryo and that of the endosperm.
Online Resource 5. All detected ratios between the ploidy of the embryo and that of the endosperm (including their abundance) showing pathways of seed formation in Cotoneaster taxa under study (based on FCSS).
Online Resource 6. Proportions of sexual vs apomictic seed formation (based on FCSS) in tetraploid Cotoneaster integerrimus s.l. – C. integerrimus s.s. (504 seeds), C. laxiflorus (326 seeds), C. alaunicus (165 seeds) and C. matrensis (44 seeds).
Online Resource 7. Proportions of sexual vs apomictic seed formation (based on FCSS) in tetraploid Cotoneaster integerrimus s.l. in the Bohemian Massif (366 seeds) vs the Western Carpathians (711 seeds).
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Macková, L., Nosková, J., Ďurišová, Ľ. et al. Insights into the cytotype and reproductive puzzle of Cotoneaster integerrimus in the Western Carpathians. Plant Syst Evol 306, 58 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00606-020-01684-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00606-020-01684-6