Leaf structure of some Echinacea species introduced in the Southern Coast of Crimea

Leaf anatomical characterization of five Echinacea species: E. angustifolia DC. (introduction number 9295), E. pallida (Nutt.) Nutt. (14709), E. paradoxa (Norton) Britton (6607), E. purpurea (L.) Moench (5807, 15309), E. tennesseensis (Beadle) Small (6106)) are given in the frame of drought resistance in the conditions of the Southern Coast of Crimea. With light microscopy, the dorsoventrality of the leaf apparatus was shown and the quantitative parameters' variability on the cross-sections was established in the studied plants. Based on the data obtained from the leaf blade cross-sections, clustering was carried out and three plant groups were distinguished: 1) E. angustifolia, 2) E. purpurea and E. tennesseensis, 3) E. pallida and E. paradoxa. An additional assessment in points (from one to six), where the maximum value corresponded to the trait that best-reflected xeromorphism, made it possible to arrange several drought-resistant plants as follows: E. tennesseensis > E. purpurea (15309) > E. purpurea (5807) > E. pallida > E. paradoxa > E. angustifolia. It has been established that the most adapted were E. tennesseensis and E. purpurea (15309, 5807).

To confirm the anatomical features based on the genetic similarity between plants, RAPD-PCR was carried out with primers OPA1-10, which gave reproducible bands and generated 209 amplicons with a length from 203.9 to 1000 bp or more. A dendrogram was constructed on the amplification data. According to the results obtained, the following clustering was observed: 1) E. paradoxa, 2) E. purpurea (5807, 15309) with E. tennessensis, and 3) E. angustifolia with E. pallida. The formation of cluster 2 confirmed the genetic similarity of E. purpurea (5807, 15309) and E. tennessensis and anatomical analysis data.

1. Анищенко Л.В., Шишлова Ж.Н. Интродукция эхинацеи пурпурной [Echinacea purpurea (L.)] Moench в ботаническом саду ЮФУ // Вестник Воронежского государственного университета. 2009. Вып. 2. С. 89–94. [Anischenko L.V., Shishlova Z.N. Introduction of purple coneflower [Echinacea purpurea (L.)] Moench in the Botanical Garden OF SFU. Proceedings of Voronezh State University. 2009. 2:89–94.]

2. Барыкина Р.П., Веселова Т.Д., Девятов А.Г., Джалилова Х.Х., Ильина Г.М., Чубатова Н.В. Справочник по ботанической микротехнике. Основы и методы. М.: Издво МГУ, 2004. 312 с. [Barykina R.P., Veselova T.D., Devyatov A.G., Dzhalilova Kh.Kh., Ilyina G.M., Chubatova N.V. Handbook of botanical microtechnology. Fundamentals and methods. M.: MSU Publisher, 2004. 312 p.]

3. Беляева Т.Н., Бутенкова А.Н. Сравнительный анализ анатомии листовых пластинок Echinacea purpurea и E. pallida // Biosystems Diversity. 2018. Т. 26. №2. С. 77–84. DOI:10.15421/011812 [Belaeva T.N., Butenkova A.N. Comparative analysis of the leaf anatomy of Echinacea purpurea and E. pallida // Biosystems Diversity. 2018. 26 (2):77–84. DOI:10.15421/011812]

4. Генкель П.А. Физиология жаро- и засухоустойчивости растений. М.: Наука. 1988. 280 с. [Genkel P.A. Physiology of heat and drought resistance of plants. M.: Science. 1988. 280 p.]

5. Киселева Г.К. Анатомо-морфологическая оценка адаптивного потенциала сортов плодовых культур и винограда // Современные методологические аспекты организации селекционного процесса в садоводстве и виноградарстве / ред. Г.В. Еремин. Краснодар: СКЗНИИСиВ. 2012. С. 199–205. [Kiseleva G.K. Anatomo-morphological assessment of adaptive potential of fruit and grape varieties // Modern methodological aspects of organization of selection process in horticulture and viticulture / E.V. Eremin (Ed.). Krasnodar: NCFSCHVW, 2012. P. 199–205.]

6. Князева С.Г., Хантемирова Е.В. Сравнительный анализ генетической и морфолого-анатомической изменчивости можжевельника обыкновенного Juniperus communis L.) // Генетика. 2020. Т. 56. № 1. С. 55–66. DOI: 10.31857/S0016675820010075 [Knyazeva S.G., Hantemirova E.V. Comparative analysis of genetic and morpho-anatomical variability of common juniper (Juniperus communis L.) // Genetics. 2020. 56 (1):55–66. DOI: 10.31857/S0016675820010075]

7. Козюкина Ж.Т. Устойчивость растений к отрицательным факторам среды: Уч. пособ. по спецкурсу «Устойчивость растений». Днепропетровск: ДГУ, 1980. 104 с. [Kozyukina Zh.T. Plant resistance to negative environmental factors: Textbook to the special course "Plant sustainability". Dnepropetrovsk: DSU. 1980. 104 p.]

8. Куркин В.А., Чепурнова А.С., Рыжов В.М., Тарасенко Л.В., Суворова Г.Н., Авдеева Е.В. Анатомическое и морфологическое изучение травы эхинацеи пурпурной с помощью цифровой микроскопии // Медицинский альманах. 2009. Вып. №2 (7). С. 204–206. [Kurkin V.A., Chepurnova A.S., Ryzhov V.M., Tarasenko L.V., Suvorova G.N., Avdeeva E.V. Anatomical and morphological study of the herb Echinacea purpurea using digital microscopy // Medical Almanac. 2009. 2 (7):204–206.]

9. Логвиненко Л.А., Шевчук О.М., Коростылев А.А. Морфологические и биологические особенности видов рода Echinacae Moench при интродукции на Южный берег Крыма // Бюллетень Гocударственного Никитского Ботанического Сада. 2021. Вып.140. С. 103–110. DOI:10.36305/0513-1634-2021-140-103-110 [Logvinenko L.A., Shevchuk O.M., Korostylev A.A. Morphological and biological features of species of the genus Echinacae Moench during introduction to the Southern coast of the Crimea. Bulletin of the State Nikitsky Botanical Gardens. 2021. 140:103–110. DOI:10.36305/0513-1634-2021-140-103-110]

10. Логвиненко Л.А., Шевчук О.М. Особенности роста и развития видов рода Echinaceae Moench в условиях Южного берега Крыма // Биология растений и садоводство: теория, инновации. 2019. Вып. 151. C. 55–65. DOI:10.36305/2019-2-151-5565 [Logvinenko L.A., Shevchuk O.M. Features of growth and development of species of the genus Echinacea Moench under the conditions of the Southern Coast of the Crimea // Plant Biology and Horticulture: theory, innovation. 2019. 151:55–65. DOI:10.36305/2019-2-151-55–65]

11. Супрун И.И., Маляровская В.И., Степанов И.В., Самарина Л.С. IRAP-анализ для оценки генетической стабильности эндемичных и исчезающих видов флоры Западного Кавказа в коллекции in vitro // Вавиловский журнал генетики и селекции. 2019. Т. 23, № 1. С. 8–14. [Suprun I.I., Malyarovskaya V.I., Stepanov I.V., Samarina L.S. IRAP-analysis for evaluating the genetic stability of endemic and endangered species of the Western Caucasus flora in the collection in vitro. Vavilov Journal of Genetic and Breeding. 2019. 23 (1):8–14. DOI: 10.18699/VJ19.455]

12. Birt D.F., Widrlechner M.P., La Lone C.A., Wu L., Bae J., Solco A.K.S., Kraus G.A., Murphy P.A., Wurtele E.S., Leng Q., Hebert S.C., Maury W.J., Price J.P. Echinacea in infection // The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 2008. Vol. 87 (2). P. 488–492. DOI:10.1093/ajcn/87.2.488S

13. Bowen B. Natural areas protection at its best protecting the Tennessee purple coneflower (Echinacea tennesseensis) // Natural Areas Journal. 2011. Vol. 31 (4). P. 326–330. DOI:10.3375/043.031.0402

14. Drew M.B., Clebsch E.E.C. Studies on the endangered Echinacea tennesseensis (Asteraceae): Plant community and demographic analysis // Castanea. 1995. Vol. 60 (1). P. 60– 69.

15. Hammer Ø., Harper D. A. T., Ryan P. D. PAST: Paleontological statistics software package for education and data analysis // Palaeontologia Electronica. 2001. Vol. 4 (1). P. 1–9.

16. Hendrickson J.R., Moffet C. Forage Systems for the temperate subhumid and semiarid areas // Forages: The Science of Grassland Agriculture, Volume II, Seventh Edition / K.J. Moore, M. Collins, C.J. Nelson, D.D. Redfearn (Eds.). Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Published. 2020. P. 387–405. DOI: 10.1002/9781119436669.ch2

17. Heidari S., Fotouhi Ghazvini R., Kafi M., Zavareh M. Effect of drought stress on some morphological and physiological characteristics of Echinacea spp. // Acta Horticulturae. 2021. Vol. 1315. P. 445–451. DOI 10.17660/ActaHortic.2021.1315.66

18. Heidari S., Fotouhi Ghazvini R., Zavareh M., Kafi M. Flowering, physiological and biochemical responses of two Echinacea species to drought stress // Agriculturae Conspectus Scientificus. 2019. Vol. 84 (3). P. 263–270.

19. Kapteyn J., Goldsbrough P.B., Simon J.E. Genetic relationships and diversity of commercially relevant Echinacea species // Theoretical and Applied Genetics. 2002. Vol.105. P. 369–376. DOI: 10.1007/s00122-002-0960-y

20. Keller H.W. The genus Echinacea (Asteraceae): floral, stem, and petiole morphology // Journal of the Botanical Research Institute of Texas. 2014. Vol. 8 (1). P. 87–126.

21. Kindscher K. The biology and ecology of Echinacea species // Echinacea: Herbal Medicine with a Wild History 1st ed. / K. Kindscher (Ed.). 2016. Cham: Springer. P. 47–54. DOI:10.1007/978-3-319-18156-1_5

22. Kumar R.M. Pharmacological importance of Echinacea purpurea // International Journal of Pharma and Bio Sciences. 2011. Vol. 2 (4). P. 304–314.

23. Magugu J.W., Feng S., Huang Q., Zhang Y., West G.H. Analysis of future climate scenarios and their impact on agriculture in eastern Arkansas, United States // Journal of Water and Land Development. 2018. Vol. 37. P. 97–112.

24. Maltas E., Dageri A., Vural H.C., Yildiz S. Investigation on biochemical and molecular analysis of Echinacea genotypes // Plant. 2015. Vol. 3 (1). P. 1–7. DOI: 10.11648/j.plant.20150301.11

25. McGregor R. The taxonomy of the genus Echinacea (Compositae) // University of Cansas Science Bulletin. 1968. Vol. 48 (4). P. 113–142.

26. Mistríková I., Vaverkovа S. Morphology and anatomy of Echinacea purpurea, E. angustifolia, E. pallida and Parthenium integrifolium // Biologia, Bratislava. 2007. Vol. 62 (1). P. 2–5.

27. Snyder K.M., Baskin J.M., Baskin C.C. Comparative ecology of the narrow endemic Echinacea tennesseensis and two geographically widespread congeners: relative competitive ability and growth characteristics // International Journal of Plant Sciences. 1994. Vol. 155 (1). Р. 57–65.

28. Still D.W., Kim D. H., Aoyama N. Genetic variation in Echinacea angustifolia along a climatic gradient // Annals of Botany. 2005. Vol. 96 (3). P. 467–477.

29. Wolf H.-T., Zündorf I., Winckler T., Bauer R., Dingermann T. Characterization of Echinacea species and detection of possible adulterations by RAPD analysis // Planta Medica. 1999. Vol. 65 (08). P. 773–774. DOI:10.1055/s-2006-960866.