Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-hfldf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-03T03:17:24.559Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Interspecific Hybridization Between Common Ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia) and Giant Ragweed (A. trifida)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Gilles Vincent  and
Mario Cappadocia
Gilles Vincent
Affiliation:
Montreal Botanical Garden, 4101 est, Sherbrooke, Montreal, QC, Canada, H1X 2B2
Mario Cappadocia
Affiliation:
Institut botanique, Univ. Montreal, 4101 est, Sherbrooke, Montreal, QC, Canada, H1X 2B2
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Common ragweed [Ambrosia artemisiifolia L. # AMBEL (2n=36)] and giant ragweed [A. trifida L. # AMBTR (2n=24)] are two abundant annuals that are widespread throughout northeastern North America. They are also the main cause of hay fever in Eastern Canada. The formation of a hybrid between the two species has been reported only once and just one type of hybrid was recovered; namely, common ragweed × giant ragweed. In order to create additional suitable material for future studies of the biochemical features characterizing the allergenic pollen, the production of reciprocal hybrids between common and giant ragweed was attempted. A number of hybrid plants derived from crosses of the type common ragweed × giant ragweed were easily obtained; the reciprocal crosses, however, failed to produce viable plants. In this last case, evidence of postzygotic barriers of interspecific incompatibility were shown by the presence of underdeveloped embryos contained in the few seeds recovered. Embryo culture techniques, therefore, were used in order to bypass such barriers. By this method fifteen plants of hybrid constitution survived to maturity.

Keywords

Hay feverhybridsembryo rescueAMBELAMBTR
Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 35 , Issue 5 , September 1987 , pp. 633 - 636
Copyright
Copyright © 1987 by the Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature Cited

1. Abul-Fatih, H. A. and Bazzaz, F. A. 1979. The biology of Ambrosia trifida L. II. Germination, emergence, growth and survival. New Phytol. 83:817–827.Google Scholar
2. Bassett, I. J. and Crompton, C. W. 1971. Canada havens from hay fever. Information Canada, Ottawa. 28 pp.Google Scholar
3. Bassett, I. J. and Crompton, C. W. 1975. The biology of Canadian weeds. 11. Ambrosia artemisiifolia L. and A. psilostachya DC. Can. J. Plant Sci. 55:463–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Bassett, I. J. and Crompton, C. W. 1982. The biology of Canadian weeds. 55. Ambrosia trifida L. Can. J. Plant Sci. 62:1003–1010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Bazzaz, F. A. 1970. Secondary dormancy in the seeds of common ragweed Ambrosia artemisiifolia . Bull. Torrey Bot. Club. 97:302–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Bhojwani, S. S. and Razdan, M. K. 1983. Plant tissue culture: theory and practice. Elsevier, Amsterdam. 502 pp.Google Scholar
7. Cappadocia, M., Cheng, D.S.K., and Ludlum-Simonette, R. 1984. Plant regeneration from in vitro culture of anthers of Solanum chacoense Bitt. and interspecific diploid hybrids S. tuberosum L. × S. chacoense Bitt. Theor. Appl. Genet. 69:139–143.Google Scholar
8. Chaleff, R. S. 1981. Genetics of higher plants. Application of cell culture. Pages 148–156. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
9. De Nettancourt, D., Devreux, M., Laneri, U., Cresti, M., Pacini, E., and Sarfati, G. 1974. Genetical and ultrastructural aspects of self- and cross-compatibility in interspecific hybrids between self-compatible Lycopersicon esculentum and self-incompatible L. peruvianum . Theor. Appl. Genet. 44:278–288.Google Scholar
10. Dickerson, C. T. and Sweet, R. D. 1971. Common ragweed ecotypes. Weed Sci. 19:64–66.Google Scholar
11. Heller, R. 1953. Recherche sur la nutrition minérale des tissus végétaux cultivés in vitro . Ann. Sci. Natl. Bot. 14:1–223.Google Scholar
12. Jones, K. L. 1943. Studies on Ambrosia. III. Pistillate Ambrosia elatior × A. trifida and its bearing on matroclinic sex inheritance. Bot. Gaz. 105:226–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Jones, K. L. and Fuller, G. D. 1955. Vascular plants of Illinois. Univ. Illinois Press, Urbana.Google Scholar
14. Martin, F. W. 1959. Staining and observing pollen tubes in the style by means of fluorescence. Stain Technol. 34:125–128.Google Scholar
15. Murashige, T. and Skoog, F. 1962. A revised medium for rapid growth and bioassays with tobacco tissue culture. Physiol. Plant. 37:80–82.Google Scholar
16. Nie, N. H., Hull, C., Jenkins, J. G., Steinbrenner, K., and Bent, D. H. 1975. SPSS: Statistical package for the social sciences. McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York.Google Scholar
17. Quiros, C. F. 1975. Exine pattern of a hybrid between Lycopersicon esculentum and Solanum pennellii . J. Hered. 66:45–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18. Stupak, N. N. 1984. Raising Gerbera jamesonii planting material from seeds. Nauchn. Tr. Nauchno Issled. Inst. Gornogo Sadovod. i Tsvetovod. 31:143–147.Google Scholar
19. Wagner, W. H. 1958. The hybrid ragweed, Ambrosia artemisiifolia × trifida . Rhodora 60:309–316.Google Scholar
20. Wiley, R. B. 1915. A hybrid ragweed. Proc. Iowa Acad. Sci. 22:127–128.Google Scholar
21. Wilson, A. C. 1976. Gene regulation in evolution. Pages 225–236 in Ayala, F. J., ed. Molecular evolution. Sunderland, MA.Google Scholar