Skip to main content
Fig. 1 | BMC Plant Biology

Fig. 1

From: Transcriptomic comparison sheds new light on regulatory networks for dimorphic flower development in response to photoperiod in Viola prionantha

Fig. 1

Morphological comparison between chasmogamous (CH) and cleistogamous (CL) flowers in Viola prionantha. (A, B) CH flowers. (C) CH flower stamens. Five stamens with invisible filaments were developed, showing distinct nectar glands. (D) Pistil in CH flower. (E, F) CL flower. (G) CL flower stamens. Only two stamens with visible filaments were developed. (H) Pistil in CL flower. The two stamens were removed. (I) inCL flower. (J) inCL flower stamens. Three to five stamens were developed with visible filaments. (K) Pistil in inCL flower. (L) The CH–CL floral transition under different photoperiods. Standard errors are provided, and lowercase letters (a, b, and c) indicate significant differences (P < 0.05). (M) Flowering time variation. (NR) CH flowers at different developmental stages. (SW) CL flowers at different developmental stages. Floral development as revealed by stereomicroscope analysis, and five stages (Stages 1 to 5, S1–S5 as indicated) are roughly defined. Bars = 500 µm in A–K and N–W. se, sepal; pe, petal; Lpe, lower petal; st, stamen; ca, carpel; sg, stigma; an, anther; sc, stamen cap; fi, filament; ng, nectar gland

Back to article page