Back

Sex Lability and Dimorphism in Diecious Palmer Amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri)

B. Mesgaran, M.; Matzrafi, M.; Ohadi, S.

2019-09-14 plant biology
10.1101/769935 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Dioecious weeds (separate sexes) may benefit from a maximized outcrossing and optimal sex-specific resource allocation but there are costs associated with the evolution of this breeding system which can be exploited for long-term management of dioecious weeds. That is, seed production in dioecious species is contingent upon the co-occurrence and co-flowering of the two genders and can be further complicated by biases in sex ratio. We therefore explored the sex ratio and dimorphism in secondary sex characters in three populations of Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) from California, Kansas and Texas and tested if water stress can change the sex expression and/or the synchrony of flowering (anthesis) between male and female plants. Sex ratio (proportion of males) was balanced and did not deviate from 1:1 in all experiments and populations (California, Kansas, Texas) when plants received normal watering. Male and female plants of A. palmeri did not differ in timing of emergence, plant height and relative growth rate. While the initiation of flowering (emergence of inflorescence) occurred earlier in males than females, females preceded males in timing of anthesis. Water stress delayed anthesis in males to a larger extent than females giving rise to an anthesis mismatch as large as seven days between the two sexes. Water stress induced a female sex expression in Kansas population giving rise to a female to male ratio of 1.78 which significantly differed from the equal 1:1 sex ratio. Our data provide the first evidence of sex lability and environment sex determination (ESD) in A. palmeri, suggesting manipulation of sex expression and phenological asynchrony as novel tools for ecological management of dioecious weeds.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.