Flower Structures: Evolution and Adaptation of Beautiful Buckwheats

[YourLooks]

Admittedly I don't understand why flowers turn out to have so many different structures AND have so many species ? Is it because of the environment, and the adaptation, mutation speciation etc. In my picture folder, there are 30 different beautiful buckwheats I have downloaded, all have different colors and and live in different regions. Below is the white one I really love...
Thank you,

 

[Sariaht]

The reason must truelly be that flowers don't have to be perfect, they survive anyway.
Think of it; What is the fittest flower? What is a bad mutation for a flower?

Also looks don't matter for a flower. They may look however they like, as long as they manage the photosynthesis and to eat dirt.

Very good question by the way.

 

[Phobos]

What is the fittest flower?

The one that best helps the plant survive & reproduce in a given environment/ecosystem.

What is a bad mutation for a flower?

One that does the opposite.
Example 1...if flower A needs to display a particular shade of blue to attract a particular species of insect, a mutation that changes the color could be harmful
Example 2...A mutation that makes it harder to get at the reproductive bits.

Also looks don't matter for a flower.

Actually, the looks of a flower can be very important. The look of a flower can play a big part in attracting the insects that help spread its pollen. I daresay that the main purpose of a flower (the pretty petals, that is) is to be a visual attractor.

as long as they manage the photosynthesis and to eat dirt.

The green leaves do the photosynthesis.
The roots gather nutrients from soil.
(sometimes a bush/vine/etc. can have flowers and I'm just distinguishing between that an a flower that is more stem/root inclusive)

 

[Phobos]

Is it because of the environment, and the adaptation, mutation speciation etc.

yes, plus cross-pollenation, etc.

many plant species also specialize to certain conditions (e.g., attracting certain insect species)

 

[Sariaht]

Actually, the looks of a flower can be very important. The look of a flower can play a big part in attracting the insects that help spread its pollen. I daresay that the main purpose of a flower (the pretty petals, that is) is to be a visual attractor.

Then how come the same cind of flower can have different colors?

The reason why flowers may variate a lot in looks is that the basics of a flower is very simple and mutations are not as dangerous to flowers as to bies for instance, partly (obviously) because they are not as physically active, they have no eyes, they have no smell, not a lot of inner organs (by the looks of them)

You would think that not much can go wrong; A lower procentage of the flower-mutations then of the bies mutations are lethal

Flower don't depend on difficult proteinsynthesises as much as we do.
The color locus is short compared to the DNA that flowers carry on, many things can go wrong that makes no difference what so ever

Is this not obvious? Cause I really thought it was and don't pretend I'm totaly wrong

 

[Phobos]

I'm no botanist, but in general, I find that even seemingly simple organisms lead complex lives when you study the details. Flowers may seem pretty static, but they must deal with growth & reproduction which can be tricky. Some even open/close with day/night schedules.

But maybe you're right and plants have fewer harmful mutations than animals. I don't know. Hopefully someone more familiar with plant/flower biology can chime in here.

 

[Sariaht]

Yes, that would be a wonderful thing.

I'm not a specialist either, I am sorry to say. Plants have such a variated structure, animals... I don't know. Atleast plants don't eat each other. But they contain plenty of vitamins and minerals, not to mention sugar.

My biology teacher says I'm wrong.

 

[Monique]

Then how come the same cind of flower can have different colors?

Insects see a different color spectrum then we do.

The reason why flowers may variate a lot in looks is that the basics of a flower is very simple and mutations are not as dangerous to flowers as to bies for instance, partly (obviously) because they are not as physically active, they have no eyes, they have no smell, not a lot of inner organs (by the looks of them)

How do you come to the conclusion that flowers variate a lot? It's mainly through breeding that we such a broad spectrum of shapes/colors. Compare it to all the breeds of dog that were created.

You would think that not much can go wrong; A lower procentage of the flower-mutations then of the bies mutations are lethal

Why do you think that, you could reason that the simpler the organism: the more likely it is to fail. In animals there are a lot of redundant pathways, if there is a mutation in one, another can take over the function. A mutation that changes the morphology of the flower certainly would be lethal, since no pollenation would occur.

 

[Sariaht]

"you could reason that the simpler the organism: the more likely it is to fail."

That depends on how you define simple, it's as simple as that.

An early organism would perhaps have a hard time surviving today, But a simple organism might still be superior to all other lifeforms and take over the planet 3 hours after it's released, you never know.

Lets say you have an early organism (that is ofcourse simple) and give it humongous intrones that contains all known working exones whitout start/stopp codone so that it does not code for proteins yet, then you release it in nature. If the organism mutate it has a lower chance of having a bad mutation, ain't that so? Then the risk is much higher that the genetically modified organism survives than other of its cind.

Is the organism still simple?

What I am trying to say is that survival of the species does not depend on how advanced the organism is, it depends on how fitt it is.

A virus might kill our entire population though they are relatively simple.

Java is quicker then assembler, but assembler programs are often quicker than Java programs and much shorter.

 

[Sariaht]

The number of breeds depends on how many different allels there can be on locus and shows how many solutions there are to solve a problem, if a flower has more allels of different cinds then a dog per loci, a mutation seems lesser dangerous for a dog than for a flower, couldn't that be so?

But if your sure it's not so then so be it.