Overview

Brief Summary

Linanthus parryae (pronounced “parry-eye”) is a tiny annual plant living in deserts and dry regions of California (U.S. A.). In years with lots of rain, so many L. parryae germinate that the ground is covered with the little white-flowered plants, whose common name is “desert snow.” But in some places, the “snow” is purplish-blue, because, though white-flowered plants are more common overall, L. parryae can also be blue-flowered. And there are some populations that are almost all blue-flowered. This has made them very interesting to evolutionary biologists who want to understand the forces behind genetic differences within and between populations. Since flower-color is a genetic difference we can easily see, L. parryae is a good organism for those kinds of studies.

Why are some populations of L. parryae almost all white, some almost all blue-purple, and some mixed? Does natural selection favor white-flowered plants in one place and blue-flowered plants in another? Or maybe flower-color (and any traits that might be linked to it) is neutral, i.e., it doesn’t affect the plant’s survival. If that’s the case, than it must be the randomness of genetic drift that has resulted in these L. parryae color mosaics. In the 1930’s the geneticist Sewall Wright developed mathematical models that showed that in small populations one type of a gene can become “fixed” as a result of randomness in who survives and reproduces. In the early 1940’s, Carl Epling and Theodosius Dobzhansky, the first to study L. parryae, concluded that genetic drift was responsible for the flower-color patterns they saw, and they cited Wright’s models (Epling & Dobzhansky 1942). Wright analyzed their data and agreed that genetic drift was the answer (Wright 1943).

But Epling and others returned to the desert and collected more data. Their conclusion this time was that it’s natural selection, not genetic drift acting to create and maintain the flower-color differences: “The conclusion seems warranted, therefore, that the frequencies of blue and white flowered plants are in the long run the product of selection operating at an intensity we have been unable to measure…” (Epling et al. 1960). However, Wright still believed that genetic drift was responsible (Wright 1978). Wright “won,” and Linanthus parryae became a textbook example of genetic drift acting in natural populations. But no one had yet collected any data actually measuring fitness, i.e., survival and reproductive success, in L. parryae to see if there were differences in how well white-flowered plants did vs. those with blue flowers. So beginning in the early 1990’s, evolutionary biologists Paulette Bierzychudek and Douglas Schemske began many years of data collection and experiments to figure out whether Wright was really right (Schemske & Bierzychudek 2001, Turelli et al. 2001, Pennisi 2007, Schemske & Bierzychudek 2007).

After over a decade of detailed, meticulous, (hot, dry, & dusty) work in the Mojave Desert and in their laboratories, they concluded that Wright was wrong. It’s actually natural selection, varying in space and time that has created the differences in flower-color among populations of L. parryae. In years with overall high seed production, white-flowered plants make more seeds. But in bad years, blue-flowered plants make more. That explains the mixed populations. Schemske and Bierzychudek also found that there are some places where ecological differences between different areas favor one flower-color over the other, and these areas can be separated by very short distances, explaining the all white and the all blue-flowered populations. So though genetic drift can still explain differences among populations of some species, we now know that flower-color in Linanthus parryae is not an example.

Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 3.0 (CC BY-NC 3.0)

© Soulanille, Elaine

Source: EOL Rapid Response Team

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Average rating: 2.5 of 5

Comprehensive Description


Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 3.0 (CC BY-NC 3.0)

© Soulanille, Elaine

Source: EOL Rapid Response Team

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Average rating: 2.5 of 5

Distribution

National Distribution

United States

Origin: Unknown/Undetermined

Regularity: Regularly occurring

Currently: Unknown/Undetermined

Confidence: Confident

Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 3.0 (CC BY-NC 3.0)

© NatureServe

Source: NatureServe

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Average rating: 2.5 of 5

Endemic to California (U.S.A.). Occurs in deserts and dry regions of the southern half of the state: southern Sierra Nevada foothills, San Joaquin Valley, eastern south coast ranges, western transverse ranges, Mojave Desert, and desert mountains (http://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/cgi-bin/get_JM_treatment.pl?Linanthus+parryae)

Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 3.0 (CC BY-NC 3.0)

© Soulanille, Elaine

Source: EOL Rapid Response Team

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Average rating: 2.5 of 5

Physical Description

Morphology

Stem: decumbent [prostrate along surface of ground] or very short-erect concealed by leaves, 2–10 cm, glandular-hairy

Leaf: lobes 5–15 mm, linear, hairy

Inflorescence: crowded leafy; flowers sessile [having no stalk; growing directly from the stem]

Flower: calyx 6–8 mm, tube obscure, membrane extended along lobes; corolla funnel-shaped, white or blue-purple, tube 1 mm, throat 1–2 mm, lobes 8–12 mm, generally jagged at tip, dark purple kidney-shaped arch at base; stamens included

(http://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/cgi-bin/get_JM_treatment.pl?Linanthus+parryae)

Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 3.0 (CC BY-NC 3.0)

© Soulanille, Elaine

Source: EOL Rapid Response Team

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Average rating: 2.5 of 5

Size

Height: Sources vary, with the range between 1 and 10 cm (Epling & Dobzhansky 1942; Epling et al. 1960; Schemske & Bierzychudek 2001; http://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/cgi-bin/get_JM_treatment.pl?Linanthus+parryae).

Flower: 1 to 1.5 cm long; 2 cm wide (Schemske & Bierzychudek 2001).

Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 3.0 (CC BY-NC 3.0)

© Soulanille, Elaine

Source: EOL Rapid Response Team

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Average rating: 2.5 of 5

Ecology

Habitat

Sandy desert flats and hard soil of arid slopes at elevations between 2000 and 6300 ft (610 to 1920 meters) (Jepson 1925).

Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 3.0 (CC BY-NC 3.0)

© Soulanille, Elaine

Source: EOL Rapid Response Team

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Average rating: 2.5 of 5

Dispersal

Seeds drop to the soil at the base of the dried mother-plant. Pollen is dispersed by the plant's only pollinator, the beetle Trichochorous sp. (Melyridae). Gene-flow studies show that genes are moving (via pollen dispersal) at least 500 m (Schemske & Bierzychudek 2007).

Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 3.0 (CC BY-NC 3.0)

© Soulanille, Elaine

Source: EOL Rapid Response Team

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Average rating: 2.5 of 5

Trophic Strategy

Primary production (autotrophy) via photosynthesis

Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 3.0 (CC BY-NC 3.0)

© Soulanille, Elaine

Source: EOL Rapid Response Team

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Average rating: 2.5 of 5

Associations

Linanthus parryae’s only pollinator is the beetle Trichochorous sp. (Melyridae) (Epling et al. 1960; Schemske & Bierzychudek 2001).

Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 3.0 (CC BY-NC 3.0)

© Soulanille, Elaine

Source: EOL Rapid Response Team

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Average rating: 2.5 of 5

Life History and Behavior

Reproduction

L. parryae is self-incompatible, out-crossing via pollination by Trichochorous sp. beetles (Epling et al. 1960; Schemske & Bierzychudek 2001).

Flower number and seed number are highly variable. In dry years, plants produce an average of 1 or 2 flowers with a total of 10 to 30 seeds. In contrast, wet years may result in many more flowers and ten times the seed production (Schemske & Bierzychudek 2001).

In years with low overall seed-production, blue-flowered plants produce more seeds than do white-flowered plants, and vice versa. In years of relatively high seed production, the white-flowered plants out-produce the blues (Schemske & Bierzychudek 2001).

Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 3.0 (CC BY-NC 3.0)

© Soulanille, Elaine

Source: EOL Rapid Response Team

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Average rating: 2.5 of 5

Molecular Biology and Genetics

Genetics

Diploid number (2N) = 18 chromosomes (http://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/cgi-bin/get_JM_treatment.pl?Linanthus+parryae)

Breeding studies by Epling et al. (1960) suggest that the flower color polymorphism is controlled by one gene, with “blue” dominant to white. However, some of their results indicate that the system may be more complicated (Epling et al. 1960). And field observations of a range of intensities among blue flowers support this possibility (Schemske & Bierzychudek 2001).

Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 3.0 (CC BY-NC 3.0)

© Soulanille, Elaine

Source: EOL Rapid Response Team

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Average rating: 2.5 of 5

Molecular Biology

Barcode data: Linanthus parryae

The following is a representative barcode sequence, the centroid of all available sequences for this species.


Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 (CC BY 3.0)

© Barcode of Life Data Systems

Source: Barcode of Life Data Systems (BOLD)

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Average rating: 2.5 of 5

Statistics of barcoding coverage: Linanthus parryae

Barcode of Life Data Systems (BOLDS) Stats
Public Records: 1
Specimens with Barcodes: 1
Species With Barcodes: 1
Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 (CC BY 3.0)

© Barcode of Life Data Systems

Source: Barcode of Life Data Systems (BOLD)

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Average rating: 2.5 of 5

Conservation

Conservation Status

National NatureServe Conservation Status

United States

Rounded National Status Rank: NNR - Unranked

Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 3.0 (CC BY-NC 3.0)

© NatureServe

Source: NatureServe

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Average rating: 2.5 of 5

NatureServe Conservation Status

Rounded Global Status Rank: G5 - Secure

Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 3.0 (CC BY-NC 3.0)

© NatureServe

Source: NatureServe

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Average rating: 2.5 of 5

Wikipedia

Linanthus parryae

Linanthus parryae is a species of flowering plant in the phlox family known by the common name sandblossoms. It is endemic to California, where it occurs in sandy, open habitat types in several regions from the Central Valley to the Sierra Nevada foothills and the Mojave Desert. This is a petite annual herb producing short stems just a few centimeters tall surrounded by hairy, needle-lobed leaves. The inflorescence, which often appears to sit directly on the ground tucked amidst the leaves, is a cluster of funnel-shaped flowers about a centimeter wide. The flowers are self-incompatible and are cross-pollinated exclusively by a Melyrid beetle, Trichochorous sp.[1] Seeds germinate after winter rains in January to February, producing flowering plants in April and shedding seeds in May to June.[2] Seeds are passively dispersed and remain viable for at least seven years, with no germination in dry years.[1] The flowers on a plant may be white or blue. Flower color is mainly controlled by a single gene locus, with the allele for blue flowers being recessive and the alleles of the white flower being of the dominant type.[2] Most populations have predominantly white flowers, with some populations mainly blue flowers, and some others with both blue and white flowered plants occurring at intermediate frequencies.[2] The proportions of each color remain quite stable over time and in some locations there are sharp transitions from blue to white flowered populations.[2] This uncommon phenomenon has made this species a model organism in studies of genetic variation.[3]

For many decades a long line of geneticists and botanists, including Sewall Wright, Carl Epling, and T. G. Dobzhansky, have studied populations of this flower to determine the factors that influence this polymorphism. Color frequencies may vary for many reasons, including genetic drift and pure natural selection. Wright built his isolation by distance and Shifting Balance theories on genetic drift in this flower using data collected by Epling and Dobzhansky in the Mojave Desert.[1] More recent studies place greater emphasis on the effects of natural selection on color frequency.[1][4][2]

References[edit]

  1. ^ a b c d Schemske, D. W. & P. Bierzychudek. (2001). Perspective: Evolution of flower color in the desert annual Linanthus parryae: Wright revisited. Evolution 55:7 1269-82.
  2. ^ a b c d e Schemkse DW & Bierzychudek P (2007) Spatial differentiation for flower color in the desert annual Linanthus parryae: was Wright right? Evolution 61-11: 2528-2543 DOI:10.1111/j.1558-5646.2007.00219.x
  3. ^ Paulette Bierzychudek - Research on Linanthus parryae
  4. ^ Turelli, M., et al. (2001). Stable two-allele polymorphisms maintained by fluctuating fitnesses and seed banks: Protecting the blues in Linanthus parryae. Evolution 55:7 1283-98.
Creative Commons Attribution Share Alike 3.0 (CC BY-SA 3.0)

Source: Wikipedia

Unreviewed

Article rating from 0 people

Average rating: 2.5 of 5

Disclaimer

EOL content is automatically assembled from many different content providers. As a result, from time to time you may find pages on EOL that are confusing.

To request an improvement, please leave a comment on the page. Thank you!