Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-x2lbr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-08T19:59:00.700Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Radicle emergence could overestimate the prediction of seed longevity in wild plants

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 December 2024

Malaka M. Wijayasinghe
Affiliation:
University of Pavia, Italy
Fiona R. Hay*
Affiliation:
Aarhus University, Denmark
Maria Tudela Isanta
Affiliation:
University of Pavia, Italy
Alma Balestrazzi
Affiliation:
University of Pavia, Italy
Louise Colville
Affiliation:
Kunming Institute of Botany, China
Hugh W. Pritchard
Affiliation:
Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, UK Kunming Institute of Botany, China
Andrea Mondoni
Affiliation:
University of Pavia, Italy
*
Corresponding author: Fiona R. Hay; Email: fiona.hay@agro.au.dk
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Seed longevity influences the success of ex situ storage and preservation of plant genetic diversity and is thus a critical factor in conservation efforts. Rapid seed ageing experiments at high temperature and high humidity have been widely used to classify seed longevity for hundreds of plant species, with potential implications for longevity in ex situ conservation. In this approach, radicle emergence (R) is normally used as a measure of the viability of the seeds. However, R could overestimate the level of normal seedling development and, consequently, the perceived longevity of seeds. Here, seed lifespan for 33 alpine species was compared to assess whether germination criteria could affect seed longevity parameters. Seeds were exposed to controlled ageing [45°C, 60% relative humidity (RH)] and regularly sampled for germination assessment as both radicle emergence (R) and radicle plus cotyledon emergence (R + C). The time taken in storage for viability to fall to 50% (p50) was determined using probit analysis, including either R or R + C data. A coefficient of overestimation of seed longevity (OESL, %) was determined. The results highlight significant differences in seed longevity estimates both across species and the germination criteria. For 17 species, seed longevity estimated by R was significantly higher than that estimated using R + C, resulting in large variation in OESL (0.54–9.01 d). The introduction of OESL facilitates effective screening for seed longevity and recovery, enhancing the overall efficiency of conservation strategies for diverse species.

Information

Type
Research Paper
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - SA
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the same Creative Commons licence is used to distribute the re-used or adapted article and the original article is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained prior to any commercial use.
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press
Figure 0

Table 1. Details of the species used in the study and seed characteristics, together with the accepted model when comparing the post-storage germination survival curves (equation 1) when the germination criterion was radicle emergence (R) or radicle and cotyledon emergence (R + C)

Figure 1

Figure. 1. Observed and fitted (equation 4) relationships between radicle (R) and radicle plus cotyledon emergence (R + C) for seeds of 33 alpine species from 14 different families, as indicated. Seeds were aged for different periods of time at 45°C and 60% RH. The black line is the line of equality (i.e. R = R + C); the curved lines show the difference between the fitted survival curves for R and R + C for the respective species where it was not possible to constrain to a common line for R and R + C.

Figure 2

Table 2. Estimates (±SE) of seed longevity parameters, Ki and σ (equation 1) and the time for viability to fall to 75 and 50% (p75 and p50) from laboratory seed storage experiments in which seeds were stored at 60% RH and 45°C with samples taken at regular intervals for a germination test

Figure 3

Table 3. Estimates (±SE) of seed longevity parameters, Ki and σ (equation 1), the time for viability to fall to 75 and 50% (p75 and p50) from laboratory seed storage experiments, and the overestimation of p75 and p50 (OESL) when the germination criterion used was radicle emergence (R) rather than radicle plus cotyledon emergence (R + C) (equations 2 and 3)

Figure 4

Figure. 2. Species ranking for relative seed longevity depending on whether the germination criterion is radicle emergence (R) or radicle plus cotyledon emergence (R + C). The y-axis scale shows p50, the time for viability to fall to 50% when seeds are stored at 45°C and 60% RH (Tables 2–5). The scale is logarithmic. The numbers next to the species name refer to the ranking. The p50 estimates for Gentiana verna and Gentianella anisodonta when R + C was the criterion were <1 (see the black arrow).

Figure 5

Table 4. Estimates (±SE) of seed longevity parameters, Ki and σ (equation 1), the time for viability to fall to 75 and 50% (p75 and p50) from laboratory seed storage experiments, and the overestimation of p75 and p50 (OESL) when the germination criterion used was radicle emergence (R) rather than radicle plus cotyledon emergence (R + C) (equations 2 and 3)

Figure 6

Table 5. Estimates of seed longevity parameters for Saxifraga stellaris (Saxifragaceae)

Supplementary material: File

Wijayasinghe et al. supplementary material 1

Wijayasinghe et al. supplementary material
Download Wijayasinghe et al. supplementary material 1(File)
File 673.3 KB
Supplementary material: File

Wijayasinghe et al. supplementary material 2

Wijayasinghe et al. supplementary material
Download Wijayasinghe et al. supplementary material 2(File)
File 119.9 KB
Supplementary material: File

Wijayasinghe et al. supplementary material 3

Wijayasinghe et al. supplementary material
Download Wijayasinghe et al. supplementary material 3(File)
File 96 KB
Supplementary material: File

Wijayasinghe et al. supplementary material 4

Wijayasinghe et al. supplementary material
Download Wijayasinghe et al. supplementary material 4(File)
File 650.1 KB
Supplementary material: File

Wijayasinghe et al. supplementary material 5

Wijayasinghe et al. supplementary material
Download Wijayasinghe et al. supplementary material 5(File)
File 633.8 KB
Supplementary material: File

Wijayasinghe et al. supplementary material 6

Wijayasinghe et al. supplementary material
Download Wijayasinghe et al. supplementary material 6(File)
File 606.9 KB
Supplementary material: File

Wijayasinghe et al. supplementary material 7

Wijayasinghe et al. supplementary material
Download Wijayasinghe et al. supplementary material 7(File)
File 8.1 MB