Skip to main content
Log in

Allozyme differentiation in theCucurbita pepo complex:C. pepo var.medullosa vs.C. texana

  • Published:
Economic Botany Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Two interfertile species ofCucurbita, the wildC. texana and the domesticatedC. pepo (var.medullosa), were hybridized to elucidate the genetic basis of inter-specific differences in isozyme phenotypes. Presented here are descriptions of phenotypes associated with 6 enzyme systems (GOT, IDH, MDH, PER, PGI, PGM). Genetic interpretation for 6 gene loci and 12 alleles is based on F2 segregation data while 10 additional loci and 15 alleles are presumed on the basis of phenotypic variation found throughout theC. pepo complex. A coefficient of genetic identity calculated for single populations of each taxon was within the range that traditionally separates species. However, observations on phenotypes in both taxa leave the taxonomic delimitation of C. texana unresolved. The complexity of banding patterns in some enzyme systems suggests a polyploid origin for the genus Cucurbita.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Literature Cited

  • Bailey, L. H. 1943. Species ofCucurbita. Gentes Herb. 6: 267–322.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berg, B. M. van den, and H. J. W. Wijsman. 1981. Genetics of the peroxidase isoenzymes inPetunia. Part 1: Organ specificity and general genetic aspects of the peroxidase isoenzymes. Theor. Appl. Genet. 60:71–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cardy, B. J., C. W. Stuber, and M. M. Goodman. 1980. Techniques for starch gel electrophoresis of enzymes from maize (Zea mays L.). Inst. Statistics Mimeo No. 1317, North Carolina State Univ., Raleigh, NC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conard, N., D. L. Asch, N. B. Asch, D. Elmore, H. Grove, M. Rubin, J. A. Brown, M. D. Wiant, K. B. Farnsworth, and T. G. Cook. 1984. Accelerator radiocarbon dating of evidence for prehistoric horticulture in Illinois. Nature 308: 443–446.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Correll, D. S., and M. C. Johnston. 1979. Manual of the Vascular Plants of Texas. Univ. Texas, Dallas, TX.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crawford, D. J. 1983. Phylogenetic and systematic inferences from electrophoretic studies.In S. D. Tanksley and T. J. Orton, ed, Isozymes in Plant Genetics and Breeding, Part A, p. 257–287. Elsevier, Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dane, F. 1983. Cucurbits.In S. D. Tanksley and T. J. Orton, ed, Isozymes in Plant Genetics and Breeding, Part B, p. 369–390. Elsevier, Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Decker, D. S. 1985. Numerical analysis of allozyme variation inCucurbita pepo. Econ. Bot. 39: 300–309.

    Google Scholar 

  • Denna, D. W., and M. B. Alexander. 1975. The isoperoxidases ofCucurbita pepo L.In C. L. Markert, ed, Isozymes II: Physiological function, p. 851–864. Academic Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erwin, A. T. 1938. An interesting Texas cucurbit. Iowa State Coll. J. Sci. 12: 253–255.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garcia, P., M. Perez de la Vega, and C. Benito. 1982. The inheritance of rye seed peroxidases. Theor. Appl. Genet. 61: 341–351.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, M. M., and C. W. Stuber. 1983. Isozymes of maize.In S. D. Tanksley and T. J. Orton, ed, Isozymes in Plant Genetics and Breeding, Part B, p. 1–33. Elsevier, Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gottlieb, L. D. 1977. Electrophoretic evidence and plant systematics. Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard. 64: 161–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • —. 1981. Electrophoretic evidence and plant populations. Prog. Phytochem. 7:1–46.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • —. 1982. Conservation and duplication of isozymes in plants. Science 216: 373–380.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • —, and N. F. Weeden. 1981. Correlation between subcellular location and phosphoglucose isomerase variability. Evolution 35: 1019–1022.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gray, A. 1868. Field, Forest and Garden Botany. American Book, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heiser, C. B., {jrJr.} 1979. The Gourd Book. Univ. Oklahoma Press, Norman, OK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kay, M., F. B. King, and C. K. Robinson. 1980. Cucurbits from Phillips Spring: new evidence and interpretations. Amer. Antiquity 45: 806–822.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nei, M. 1972. Genetic distance between populations. Amer. Naturalist 106: 283–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rick, C. M., S. D. Tanksley, and J. F. Fobes. 1979. A pseudoduplication inLycopersicon pimpinellifolium. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 76: 3435–3439.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, R. W., H. M. Munger, T. W. Whitaker, and G. W. Bohn. 1976. Genes of the Cucurbitaceae. HortScience 11: 554–568.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singh, A. K. 1979. Cucurbitaceae and polyploidy. Cytologia 44: 897–905.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, E. B. 1978. An Atlas and Annotated Checklist of the Vascular Plants of Arkansas. Univ. Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suiter, K. A., J. F. Wendel, and J. S. Case. 1983. Linkage-1: a Pascal computer program for the detection and analysis of genetic linkage. J. Heredity 74: 203–204.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Whitaker, T. W., and W. P. Bemis. 1975. Origin and evolution of the cultivatedCucurbita. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club 102: 362–368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, H. D. 1981. Genetic variation among South American populations of tetraploidChenopodium sect. Chenopodium subsect. Cellulata. Syst. Bot. 6: 380–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • —, S. C. Barber, and T. Walters. 1983. Loss of duplicate gene expression in tetraploidChe-nopodium. Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 11: 7–13.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kirkpatrick, K.J., Decker, D.S. & Wilson, H.D. Allozyme differentiation in theCucurbita pepo complex:C. pepo var.medullosa vs.C. texana . Econ Bot 39, 289–299 (1985). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02858798

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02858798

Keywords

Navigation