Floral structure of two species of Bulbophyllum section Cirrhopetalum Lindl.: B. weberi Ames and B. cumingii (Lindl.) Rchb. f. (Bulbophyllinae Schltr., Orchidaceae)
Agnieszka Kowalkowska , Sławomir Turzyński , Małgorzata Kozieradzka-Kiszkurno , Natalia Wiśniewska
AbstractFlowers of Bulbophyllum weberi and B. cumingii are characterized by fly-pollinated features. The secretory activity was described in dorsal sepals in both species (putative osmophores), petals in B. weberi (possible osmophores) and adaxial surface of lips in both species. In the cells of dorsal sepals and petals of B. weberi proteins, dihydroxyphenols, lipids and starch grains were detected, in lateral sepals—lipids. Whereas in dorsal sepal of B. cumingii only lipids and starch grains were noted, in lateral sepals—proteins and dihydroxyphenols and in petals—proteins and starch grains. The lips in both species differed histochemically and ultrastructurally. The epidermal cells of lip groove in B. weberi contained lipids, proteins, starch grains in cytoplasm, dihydroxyphenols in vacuoles and pectic acids/mucilage on surface. Whereas in B. cumingii—few lipids, starch grains, no proteins, no dihydroxyphenols and no mucilage were noted. Ultrastructurally, in B. weberi, the secretory material was present on surface and vesicles building into plasmalemma, while in B. cumingii—cell wall ingrowths and microchannels in cuticle. The osmiophilic irregular materials and globular, osmiophilic globules in B. weberi are probably tannin-like materials. For the first time, we described the cell wall ingrowths in Bulbophyllum species: in lip of B. cumingii and petals of B. weberi.
|Journal series||Protoplasma, ISSN 0033-183X, (A 30 pkt)|
|Publication size in sheets||0.9|
|Keywords in English||Bulbophyllum weberi, Bulbophyllum cumingii, Bulbophyllum, Cirrhopetalum, nectary, osmophore, ultrastructure|
|License||Other; published final; ; with publication|
|Score|| = 30.0, 20-12-2017, ArticleFromJournal|
= 30.0, 20-12-2017, ArticleFromJournal
|Publication indicators||: 2016 = 2.87 (2) - 2016=2.658 (5)|
* presented citation count is obtained through Internet information analysis and it is close to the number calculated by the Publish or Perish system.