Ontogenetic studies on the determination of the apical meristem in racemose inflorescences

This thesis presents a comparative developmental study of inflorescences and focuses on the production of the terminal flower (TF). Morphometric attributes of inflorescence meristems (IM) were obtained throughout the ontogeny of inflorescence buds with the aim of describing possible spatial constraints that could explain the failure in developing the TF. The study exposes the inflorescence ontogeny of 20 species from five families of the Eudicots (Berberidaceae, Papaveraceae-Fumarioideae, Rosaceae, Campanulaceae and Apiaceae) in which 745 buds of open (i.e. without TF) and closed (i.e. with TF) inflorescences were observed under the scanning electron microscope.rnThe study shows that TFs appear on IMs which are 2,75 (se = 0,38) times larger than the youngest lateral reproductive primordium. The shape of these IMs is characterized by a leaf arc (phyllotactic attribute) of 91,84° (se = 7,32) and a meristematic elevation of 27,93° (se = 5,42). IMs of open inflorescences show a significant lower relative surface, averaging 1,09 (se=0,26) times the youngest primordium size, which suggests their incapacity for producing TFs. The relative lower size of open IMs is either a condition throughout the complete ontogeny (‘open I’) or a result from the drastic reduction of the meristematic surface after flower segregation (‘open II’). rnIt is concluded that a suitable bulge configuration of the IM is a prerequisite for TF formation. Observations in the TF-facultative species Daucus carota support this view, as the absence of the TF in certain umbellets is correlated with a reduction of their IM dimensions. A review of literature regarding histological development of IMs and genetic regulation of inflorescences suggests that in ‘open I’ inflorescences, the histological composition and molecular activity at the tip of the IM could impede the TF differentiation. On the other side, in ‘open II’ inflorescences, the small final IM bulge could represent a spatial constraint that hinders the differentiation of the TF. The existence of two distinct kinds of ontogenies of open inflorescences suggests two ways in which the loss of the TF could have occurred in the course of evolution.rn