ear development

Peter A Peterson pap at iastate.edu
Thu Mar 14 10:02:22 EST 2002


Dr. VLADIMIR KOTERNIAK
          You have an interesting observation. Not sure that it is
instigated by your genotype o2 Bg, but in my material there is often seen
this type of abberation. Please see Figure 1 and 2 in MAYDICA XXI (1976)
157-164. Shows a change in sexuality, however the anatomical data is not
available so cannot say about the origin.  You might also look at the Hsu
and Peterson papers on microspore development,though in the tassel is
similar to that in the ear. (Iowa St. J. O Res. 55:351-373;  MAYDICA xxxii:
77-98 (1988); J GENET.L & BREED. 45:215-222 (1991) Though these are not
directly related to your observation, they can shed some light on possible
irregularities. Difficulty in your observation is what generated the
additional tissue that led to the intrusion of these spikeletes...PAP

At 06:37 PM 3/13/2002 +0000, VLADIMIR KOTERNIAK wrote:
>Dear Dr. Irish,
>
>According to my analysis the main cause of irregular rowing observed
>on one of analyzed ears (the ear homozygous for o2-hf; Bg-hf,
>containing 245 kernels in 12 rows) is the formation of additional
>spikelets, which are inserted between "the regular" rows. Four such
>separate spikelets were observed on the upper and central part of the
>ear. Three of them appear to be unpaired and one paired. All kernels
>at these spikelets were developed on upper florets.
>
>
>
>V. Koterniak
>
>
>
>  >From: Erin Irish
>  >To: koterniak at hotmail.com, maize at net.bio.net
>  >Subject: Re: ear development
>  >Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 09:28:47 -0800
>  >
>  >>
>  >>Dear Prof. Coe,
>  >>Could you please send me a copy of your article 'Clonal analysis of
>  >>corn plant development. I. The development of the tassel and the
>  >>ear
>  >>shoot' published in Dev Biol. 1983 May; 97(1):154-72. I hope your
>  >>article will help me to answer some questions arisen under
>  >>determination of the timing of the rbg reversion from the o2
>  >>allele.
>  >>(The data on ear morphology available at the MNL web site (IMP) was
>  >>very useful for me.) During this analysis I determined the
>  >>appurtenance of revertant kernels to a particular spikelet by
>  >>marking
>  >>attachment places of revertant kernels and subsequently cutting off
>  >>spikelet ear tissue remnants. Such a quite simple determination
>  >>appeared to be more difficult on the ears with 'irregular' rows.
>  >>One
>  >>of the arising questions is whether the additional spikelets (which
>  >>provoke row irregularity) always develop as a PAIR of spikelet or
>  >>not. Do you have any information on this issue?
>  >>  Thank you in advance. Sincerely yours,
>  >>  Vladimir V. Koterniak
>  >>  Senior Research Scientist
>  >>Maize and Sorghum Research Institute, Pascani, reg. Criuleni 4834,
>  >>Republic of Moldova
>  >>E-mail: koterniak at hotmail.com
>  >
>  >Dear Dr. Koterniak,
>  >  I have examined flower and spikelet development on maize ears
>  >fairly extensively. In most cases irregular rowing is the result
>  >of
>  >the development of the lower floret in each spikelet that is
>  >normally
>  >suppressed (unlike the tassel where both normally develop). I have
>  >occasionally observed unpaired spikelets. Flowers from them would
>  >also result in irregular rowing, but they are, at least in the
>  >material I look at, very uncommon.
>  >
>  >Erin Irish
>  >Department of Biological Sciences
>  >University of Iowa
>  >Iowa City, Iowa

---------
Peter A. Peterson
Agronomy Department
Iowa State University
Ames, Iowa 50011
OFFICE: [515] 294-9652
FAX: [515] 294-2299
pap at iastate.edu
http://www.public.iastate.edu/~pap/homepage.html




More information about the Maize mailing list