Abstract

Background and AimsThe transition from outcrossing to selfing is a frequent evolutionary shift in flowering plants and is predicted to result in reduced allocation to pollinator attraction if plants can self-pollinate autonomously. The evolution of selfing is associated with reduced visual floral signalling in many systems, but effects on floral scent have received less attention. We compared multiple populations of the arctic–alpine herb Arabis alpina (Brassicaceae), and asked whether the transition from self-incompatibility to self-compatibility has been associated with reduced visual and chemical floral signalling. We further examined whether floral signalling differ between self-compatible populations with low and high capacity for autonomous self-pollination, as would be expected if benefits of signalling decrease with reduced dependence on pollinators for pollen transfer.MethodsIn a common garden we documented flower size and floral scent emission rate and composition in eight self-compatible and nine self-incompatible A. alpina populations. These included self-compatible Scandinavian populations with high capacity for autonomous self-pollination, self-compatible populations with low capacity for autonomous self-pollination from France and Spain, and self-incompatible populations from Italy and Greece.Key ResultsThe self-compatible populations produced smaller and less scented flowers than the self-incompatible populations. However, flower size and scent emission rate did not differ between self-compatible populations with high and low capacity for autonomous self-pollination. Floral scent composition differed between self-compatible and self-incompatible populations, but also varied substantially among populations within the two categories.ConclusionsOur study demonstrates extensive variation in floral scent among populations of a geographically widespread species. Contrary to expectation, floral signalling did not differ between self-compatible populations with high and low capacity for autonomous self-pollination, indicating that dependence on pollinator attraction can only partly explain variation in floral signalling. Additional variation may reflect adaptation to other aspects of local environments, genetic drift, or a combination of these processes.

Highlights

  • Flowering plants are remarkably diverse, with floral traits, pollinators and mating systems playing central roles in the processes of diversification and speciation (Stebbins, 1957; Barrett, 2002; Kay et al, 2006; Kay and Sargent, 2009; Goldberg et al, 2010)

  • Results from the PERMANOVA analysis confirmed that the floral scent composition varied significantly among mating system categories (PERMANOVA, F2,14 = 5.13, P = 0.006) and populations (PERMANOVA, F16,558 = 179.8, P < 0.001), with especially the population factor explaining a substantial part of the variation in floral scent composition

  • The model with three mating system categories, where the self-compatible group was divided into populations with high and low capacity for autonomous self-pollination, classified 15 of the 17 populations correctly, with a mean out-ofbag probability of membership of the correct group of 67.8 % (Supplementary Data Fig. S2B)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Flowering plants are remarkably diverse, with floral traits, pollinators and mating systems playing central roles in the processes of diversification and speciation (Stebbins, 1957; Barrett, 2002; Kay et al, 2006; Kay and Sargent, 2009; Goldberg et al, 2010). The breakdown of self-incompatibility and the evolution of selfing is a common evolutionary transition that affects the structuring of genetic variation, the response to selection, the evolution of floral signals and rewards, and reproductive morphology in hermaphroditic plants (Barrett, 2002, 2010; Wright et al, 2013; Cutter, 2019). The evolutionary significance of such transitions is evident both because mating system shifts can be associated with speciation (Foxe et al, 2009; Wright et al, 2013) and because diversification rates might differ between self-incompatible and self-compatible lineages (Stebbins, 1957; Goldberg et al, 2010). Selfing provides a transmission advantage compared with outcrossing, but may often result in inbreeding depression (Charlesworth, 2006)

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call