So dioecious is as opposed to monoecius; two houses (meaning plants have either male or female flowers) versus one house (male and female flowers on the same plant). Monoecious plants can have either perfect (male and femal parts in the same flower) or imperfect (only one functional sex organ in the flower) flowers. Gynodieocious simply refers to a plant that is either monoecious with perfect flowers or can be unisex with only female flowers (i.e. it is never truly dioecious).
Boy that's a lot of botany to remember!
Plants are different than animals in that they exhibit alternation of gnenerations (they alternate between haploid forms and diploid forms) but they still exhibit only two sexes; that is ovum producing female parts and spermatozoa producing male parts. It just get confusing in how those parts can be arranged, hence the mutliplicity of terms to describe plant reproduction.
My favorite botanist says that botany is not rocket science, it’s harder😂 Because plants are always breaking their own rules, while in physics rules can’t be broken.
😂 I'm not sure if they're breaking rules as much as their variation defies categorization Most botanists seem to love to categorize, but as I always point out categories are a human imposition on much of nature. There are biologically real categories; the species concept (defined by sympatry in nature, meaning they live alongside one another and do not interbreed) and one can argue that the Family taxon is also biologically real (at least in plants), but everything else is kind of really us imposing an order that doesn't really exist!
In the course I took she went on to talk about that, how it’s kind of harder because we make it harder by imposing categories. But at the same time, it’s helpful to be able to recognize say, a euphorbia or something from the soapberry family because the odds are good the plant will be toxic.
Yup...euphorbia and soapberry are families, like roses and cypresses. It's interesting that almost every linguistic group has words corresponding to the plant families that occur in their area. It's things like that that lend creedence to the idea that plant families are biologically real.
In animals a similar argument is sometimes made but it's at the Order taxon; animal orders are things like Rodentia, Orthoptera, Lepidoptera, Araneae, etc.
So dioecious is as opposed to monoecius; two houses (meaning plants have either male or female flowers) versus one house (male and female flowers on the same plant). Monoecious plants can have either perfect (male and femal parts in the same flower) or imperfect (only one functional sex organ in the flower) flowers. Gynodieocious simply refers to a plant that is either monoecious with perfect flowers or can be unisex with only female flowers (i.e. it is never truly dioecious).
Boy that's a lot of botany to remember!
Plants are different than animals in that they exhibit alternation of gnenerations (they alternate between haploid forms and diploid forms) but they still exhibit only two sexes; that is ovum producing female parts and spermatozoa producing male parts. It just get confusing in how those parts can be arranged, hence the mutliplicity of terms to describe plant reproduction.
My favorite botanist says that botany is not rocket science, it’s harder😂 Because plants are always breaking their own rules, while in physics rules can’t be broken.
😂 I'm not sure if they're breaking rules as much as their variation defies categorization Most botanists seem to love to categorize, but as I always point out categories are a human imposition on much of nature. There are biologically real categories; the species concept (defined by sympatry in nature, meaning they live alongside one another and do not interbreed) and one can argue that the Family taxon is also biologically real (at least in plants), but everything else is kind of really us imposing an order that doesn't really exist!
In the course I took she went on to talk about that, how it’s kind of harder because we make it harder by imposing categories. But at the same time, it’s helpful to be able to recognize say, a euphorbia or something from the soapberry family because the odds are good the plant will be toxic.
Yup...euphorbia and soapberry are families, like roses and cypresses. It's interesting that almost every linguistic group has words corresponding to the plant families that occur in their area. It's things like that that lend creedence to the idea that plant families are biologically real.
In animals a similar argument is sometimes made but it's at the Order taxon; animal orders are things like Rodentia, Orthoptera, Lepidoptera, Araneae, etc.
I must do that!
Thank you 😊