Abstract
Populations in the central part of the distribution are mostly self-incompatible and tend to be highly variable for allozymic and morphological characters; those in the north and south limits are entirely self-compatible and tend to be genetically highly uniform. Gradations in variability are observed in the intermediate regions. Flower size tends to diminish in the peripheral areas. The extensive differences in genotype observed between the north and south marginal populations are not compatible with the concept of a single origin of self-compatibility, but suggest, along with other evidence, that the substitution of different alleles resulted from differentiation in the marginal areas from older, self-incompatible stocks of the central region. The conclusions regarding patterns of genetic variation and nature of evolution of mating systems inL. hirsutum conform to a remarkable extent with those reached previously forL. pimpinellifolium, a species that is distinct in morphology and ecological preferences yet has a similar latitudinal distribution.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Baker, H. G., 1955: Self-compatibility and establishment after long-distance dispersal. — Evolution9, 347–348.
Jain, S. K., 1976: Population structure and the effects of breeding system. InFrankel, O. H., Hawkes, J. G. (Eds.): Plant Genetic Resources: Today and Tomorrow. — London: Cambridge Univ. Press.
Levin, D. A., 1978: Genetic variation in annual phlox: self-compatible versus self-incompatible species. — Evolution32, 245–263.
Lewis, D., Crowe, L. K., 1958: Unilateral interspecific incompatibility in flowering plants. — Heredity12, 233–285.
Martin, F. W., 1963: Distribution and interrelationships of incompatibility barriers in theLycopersicon hirsutum Humb. & Bonpl. complex. — Evolution17, 519–528.
McGuire, D. C., Rick, C. M., 1954: Self-incompatibility in species ofLycopersicon sect.Eriopersicon and hybrids withL. esculentum. — Hilgardia23, 101–124.
Muller, C. H., 1940: A revision of the genusLycopersicon. — U.S. Dept. Agric. Misc. Publ.382.
Nettancourt, D. de, 1977: Self-incompatibility. — Berlin: Springer.
Rick, C. M., Fobes, J. F., 1975a: Allozymes of Galápagos tomatoes: polymorphism, geographic distribution, and affinities. — Evolution23, 443–457.
—, —, 1975b: Allozyme variation in the cultivated tomato and closely related species. — Bull. Torrey Bot. Club102, 376–384.
—, —, 1976: Peroxidase complex and concomitant anodal and cathodal variation in red-fruited tomato species. — Proceedings, National Academy of Science73, 900–904.
—, —, Holle, M., 1977: Genetic variation inLycopersicon pimpinellifolium: evidence of evolutionary change in mating systems. — Pl. Syst. Evol.127, 139–170.
—, 1978: Rates of cross-pollination inLycopersicon pimpinellifolium: impact of genetic variation in floral characters. — Pl. Syst. Evol.129, 31–44.
—, 1976: Genetic and biosystematic studies on two new sibling species ofLycopersicon from interandean, Perú. — Theor. Appl. Genetics47, 55–68.
Singh, R., 1976: Substrate-specific enzyme variation in natural populations ofDrosophila pseudoobscura. — Genetics82, 507–526.
Solbrig, O., Rollins, R. C., 1977: The evolution of autogamy in species of the mustard genusLeavenworthia. — Evolution31, 265–281.
Stoner, A. K., 1970: Breeding for insect resistance in vegetables. — Hort-Science5, 76–79.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Rick, C.M., Fobes, J.F. & Tanksley, S.D. Evolution of mating systems inLycopersicon hirsutum as deduced from genetic variation in electrophoretic and morphological characters. Pl Syst Evol 132, 279–298 (1979). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00982390
Received:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00982390