Open Access is an initiative that aims to make scientific research freely available to all. To date our community has made over 100 million downloads. It’s based on principles of collaboration, unobstructed discovery, and, most importantly, scientific progression. As PhD students, we found it difficult to access the research we needed, so we decided to create a new Open Access publisher that levels the playing field for scientists across the world. How? By making research easy to access, and puts the academic needs of the researchers before the business interests of publishers.
We are a community of more than 103,000 authors and editors from 3,291 institutions spanning 160 countries, including Nobel Prize winners and some of the world’s most-cited researchers. Publishing on IntechOpen allows authors to earn citations and find new collaborators, meaning more people see your work not only from your own field of study, but from other related fields too.
How to Save Endangered Magnolias? From Population Biology to Conservation Action: The Case of Allopatric Radiation in Western Mexico
Written By
José Antonio Vázquez-García, Miguel Angel Muñiz-Castro, Alex Dahua-Machoa, Edison Antonio Osorio-Muñoz, Gerardo Hernández-Vera, Alondra Salomé Ortega-Peña, Rosa de Lourdes Romo-Campos, César Jacobo-Pereira, Noelia Álvarez de Román and Viacheslav Shalisko
Submitted: July 29th, 2020Reviewed: October 6th, 2020Published: February 15th, 2021
Numerous Neotropical Magnolia species are endangered and red-listed by the IUCN. Here we highlight major results from over a decade of research on endangered magnolias in western Mexico. Particularly, we compare three species of Magnolia (M. pugana, M. pacifica and M. vallartensis) along a large-scale continentality and moisture gradients, in terms of a) their morphological adaptations, b) genetic structure, diversity, and differentiation, c) reproductive phenology, and d) floral scents and their floral visitors. Fieldwork along this gradient unveiled two new species of Magnolia sect. Magnolia; M. granbarrancae and M. talpana. We found that most continental populations have a higher extinction risk than those with greater maritime influence, due to their lower genetic diversity, and greater fragmentation, isolation, and water stress. Also, these populations are more vulnerable to the environmental conditions predicted with the global warming climate scenarios. We share fieldwork experience and advise on pre-germination treatments and seed dormancy. We propose an ex-situ and in-situ conservation strategy, identify new challenges, and suggest future directions of collaborative work as a global Magnolia conservation consortium.
University Center for Biological and Agricultural Sciences, of the University of Guadalajara, México
Miguel Angel Muñiz-Castro
University Center for Biological and Agricultural Sciences, of the University of Guadalajara, México
Alex Dahua-Machoa
University Center for Biological and Agricultural Sciences, of the University of Guadalajara, México
Edison Antonio Osorio-Muñoz
Research and Development Group in Sciences Applied to Biological Resources, Ecuador
Gerardo Hernández-Vera
University Center for Biological and Agricultural Sciences, of the University of Guadalajara, México
Alondra Salomé Ortega-Peña
University Center for Biological and Agricultural Sciences, of the University of Guadalajara, México
Rosa de Lourdes Romo-Campos
University Center for Biological and Agricultural Sciences, of the University of Guadalajara, México
César Jacobo-Pereira
University Center for Biological and Agricultural Sciences, of the University of Guadalajara, México
Noelia Álvarez de Román
Botanic Gardens Conservation International, United Kingdom
Viacheslav Shalisko
University Center for Biological and Agricultural Sciences, of the University of Guadalajara, México
*Address all correspondence to: talaumaofeliae@gmail.com
1. Introduction
Magnolias have captivated mankind since ancient times, their lush evergreen foliage, varied floral scents and spectacular flowers make them highly attractive. Distributed from temperate to tropical areas of the Americas and Asia, they have an extraordinary value in horticulture, they are harvested from natural forests, either as a beauty item for solemn ceremonial rites or as a source of wood for construction, food, and traditional medicine [1, 2].
The family Magnoliaceae Juss. [3] belongs to one of the basal clades in the angiosperms, it consists of 350 species, two genera, LiriodendronL. [4] and MagnoliaL. [4] and 15 sections [5]. It is disjunct and bicontinental; in the America and SE Asia, from near sea level to 3400 m [6].
The fossil record suggests a North American origin for the family, migrating east through the Disko Island, Greenland, and Thulean Landbridge, with a range expansion into Europe and eventually to Asia. The cooling of the climate during the mid-Cenozoic resulted in a migration to lower latitudes and the extinction of Magnoliaceae in Europe and Siberia. Finally, the Ice-house conditions of the late-Cenozoic drove the group further south to highlands of Central and South America, as well as the mountains in South-east Asia [7].
In Mexico, as a result of allopatric speciation, there are 36 species in three sections of Magnolia: M. section MacrophyllaeFiglar & Noot. [8] with five species of dorsal dehiscence [1, 9], M.sect. Talauma(Juss.) Baill. [3, 10] with 13 species mostly of ventral dehiscence [2] and M. sect. Magnoliawith 18 species of dorsal dehiscence [11, 12].
In western Mexico, there are eight species of Magnolia[13], two belong to M. sect. Talauma: M. jaliscanaA. Vázquez & R. Guzmán [14] and M. ofeliaeA. Vázquez & Cuevas [15]— both confined to the lower slopes of the Pacific Lowlands province at the edge of the Sierra Madre del Sur province— and six belong to M. sect. Magnolia: M. iltisianaA. Vázquez [11], from the highlands of the Sierra Madre del Sur; M. pacificaA. Vázquez [11] from the western end of the Sierra Madre del Sur province to the western end of the Transmexican Volcanic Belt province; M. pugana(Iltis & A. Vázquez) A. Vázquez & Carvajal [16] from the canyons and valleys north of Guadalajara city, in the Transmexican Volcanic Belt; M. vallartensisA. Vázquez & Muñiz-Castro [14] in the Pacific Lowland province southeast of Puerto Vallarta; and the two species here described as new (Figure 1).
Figure 1.
Current distribution ofMagnoliasect.Magnoliain western México and their occurrence in biogeographic provinces [17]. Except forM.iltisianaall belong to theMagnolia pacificacomplex. UndeterminedMagnolia(M.sp).
Here, we mostly focus in the species which constitute the Magnolia pacificaspecies complex [11], consisting of species with glabrous ellipsoid fruits distributed from tropical climate lowlands to temperate climate mountains in the confluence of four biogeographic provinces Sierra Madre Occidental, Sierra Madre del Sur, Pacific Lowlands and Transmexican Volcanic Belt [17] (Figure 1). Populations of the Barrancae Group, occurring in the Río Verde region in the Zapotlanejo e Ixtlahuacán del Río municipalities (north of Guadalajara city) [18] are here described as a new species (M. granbarrancae). Similarly, populations from the mountains of southern Talpa de Allende in W Jalisco are here described as a new species: M. talpana;while several populations from northern Nayarit, considered morphologically distinct from M. pacificasensu stricto are here designated as the Huajicori group.
Magnolias in western Mexico, occur in four of its six biogeographic provinces, isolated in canyons (“barrancas”) or protected ravines of mountains, with minimum if any gene flow among their populations. They have undergone allopatric radiation, diverging in morphology, genetics, phenology, floral scents, and occupy different ecological niches (Figure 1) [11, 14, 18, 19, 20].
Here we aim to compare three species of Magnoliaalong a large-scale continentally and moisture gradients, in terms of (a) their morphological adaptations, (b) genetic structure, diversity, and differentiation, (c) reproductive phenology, and (d) floral scents and visitors; we also present an extinction risk assessment of each of the species and their vulnerability to predicted global warming climate scenarios.
Seven morphological distinct taxa of the Magnolia pacificaspecies complex occur in western Mexico (Figure 1), however most comparisons in this study include the three species growing along a continentality and moisture gradient, from west to east: M. vallartensis, M. pacificaand M. puganaand only few comparisons (morphological and genetical) also include discussion of the M. granbarrancaeand M. talpanahere described as new.
2.2 Morphological differentiation and adaptations
2.2.1 Habit and foliage
All species in the Magnolia pacificacomplex are evergreen long leaved and usually sympodial and tortuous trees. M. vallartensisand the new M. granbarrancaeare generally small trees (8.0–15.0(−23.0) m) with smaller trunk diameter at breast height (1.3 m) (0.2–0.5 m), while M. pugana, M. pacificaand the new M. talpanaare large trees (15.0–35.0 m) with thicker trunks, (0.3–1.6 m) in diameter at breast height.
The leaves in Magnolia vallartensisare distinctively broadly elliptic to elliptic or occasionally oblong, while the other four species are narrowly elliptical to elliptical to oblanceolate. The width to length ratio of mature leaves is larger in M. vallartensis(45–51%) than that of the other species M. pacifica(30–39%).
2.2.2 Flowers and floral visitors
Flowers of Magnoliasin western Mexico differ in their pollination chamber, whether having a fully distinct chamber at female phase (day zero) involving all petals, like in M. vallartensis, M. talpanaand M. iltisiana,or with an incipient or loose chamber involving mostly the inner petals. M. vallartensis, has a distinct subglobose pollination chamber, M. iltisianahas an oblongoid one and M. talpanahas the narrowest oblongoid and tight chamber. Magnolia granbarrancaeand M. puganahave the greater width to length ratio on petals and sepals while M. talpanahas the smallest one.
Like other basal angiosperm lineages such as Araceae, Arecaceae, Cyclanthaceae, Nymphaeaceae and Annonaceae, the family Magnoliaceae exhibits floral traits that have been hypothesized as evolutionary adaptations to beetle pollination (cantharophily) [21]. In general, large, bisexual flowers, with petals, tepals or floral receptacles forming a bowl shape, have been considered as distinctive features of the beetle pollination syndrome [22]. Within the Magnoliaceae, specific traits include the development of female floral structures before the male ones (protogyny) to ensure cross pollination, floral odors, floral movements and the production of heat by reproductive structures as a result of biochemical reactions (thermogenesis) [23].
Coleoptera (Scarabaeidae) have been observed feeding and mating in flowers of Magnolia puganaand M. pacifica(M. talpana), causing damage to the petals and sepals (Figure 2). Despite cantharophily is the most common pollination syndrome in basal angiosperms, hymenopterans have been observed visiting flowers of M. pacificas. s. (Huajicori group) and M. vallartensis. In the latter species we can confirm that hymenopterans play a role in pollination given that we were able to photograph some bees with significant amounts of pollen attached to the specialized hairs in their hind legs (Figure 2). The known floral visitors to each of the studied Magnoliaspecies are listed in Table 1. Insect pollination represents a fundamental ecosystem service in natural habitats, particularly for obligate insect-pollinated plant species [26, 27], however, there is still little knowledge on insect floral visitors and the floral biology of most of Magnoliaspecies, therefore, further studies including more field observations are much needed.
Figure 2.
Known floral visitors to the magnolias in theMagnolia pacificaspecies complex. A–C,Strigoderma sulcipennisonM. pugana; damage to the petals and sepals by the beetle is visible. D–F,Cyclocephalasp. sheltering inside flowers ofM. talpana. G–I, representatives ofFrieseomelitta nigravisiting stamens ofM. vallartensis; pollen can be seen attached to their hind legs. Photographs A–C by G. Hernández-Vera, D–I by M. Muñiz-Castro.
Known insect floral visitors to each of the studied Magnoliaspecies. The “x” indicates unidentified taxonomic rank.
2.2.3 Fruits and seeds
The fruits of Magnolia,often called polyfollicles, consist of spirally arranged carpels, initially free and in some species becoming concrescent. Dehiscence in all three species of the M. pacificacomplex is dorsal and bivalve. Magnolia granbarrancaeand the Huajicori group have ovoid and smaller fruits (Figure 3). Basal carpels are larger in M. pacificathan in any other species, while the carpel apex are distinctively more pronounced in M. vallartensis.
Figure 3.
Morphological divergence in flowers and fruits ofMagnoliasect.Magnoliain Jalisco, Mexico.
Magnoliaseeds are attached to the fruit by thin funicular threads that keep them suspended after release for one or two days before falling to the ground. They have a three-layer coat, the outer one called sarcotesta is bright, red to orange colored (that is attractive for their dispersers, the birds), fleshy and with persistent odor oils that make it impervious to water and gas exchange, containing inhibitors for germination and can protect it from some diseases and predators; the middle cover is called testa and provides mechanical protection as it is hard and bony, with a dark or light-colored depending on the species; the inner coat is a thin membrane that surrounds the endosperm, within which a rudimentary embryo is present [28, 29]. For the magnolias of the pacific complex, the seeds are prismatic to triangular with scarlet red sarcotesta and light-colored testa, presenting more similarity between M. puganaand M. vallartensiswith seeds of the same size (9–12 × 7–8 mm) and shape (sub-cylindrical or round-compressed) and small variations with M. pacificaseeds, that are slightly bigger (8–14 × 7–11 mm) and sub-cylindrical to cylindrical or rounded to compressed [13].
Type: MEXICO. Jalisco: Zapotlanejo municipality, on a slope on the southern margin of the Río Verde river, beside a rocky spring, 80 m NE from Las Cruces ravine, 3–5 km NNW from Matatlán, 20°44′30.4” N, 103°09′56.8” W, 1073 m, 23 Jan 2012 (fl), M. Á. Muñiz-Castro, R. Murguía, J. Padilla-Lepe & M. Cházaro-Basañez918 (holotype IBUG!, isotype, MEXU).
Diagnosis. Magnolia granbarrancaeis similar to M. puganain having broadly obovate sepals, but it differs from the latter in having flowers smaller, 7.0–8.0 vs. 11–14 cm; a tight pollination chamber vs. a loose one; fruit smaller 3.9–5.3 vs. 5.0–7.5. cm, subglobose to broadly obovoid vs. oblongoid to ellipsoid; carpels more numerous 24–32 vs. 16–22, seeds orange vs. scarlet red.
Trees of (8) 10.0–15.0 m tall, 60–70 cm dbh, leaves11.2–16.6 × (3.5) 4.6–6.3 cm, oblanceolate to elliptical, obtuse at the apex, acute at the base, glabrous, with 20 pairs of lateral veins; linear stipules 0.95–1 × 0.15–0.2 cm; petioles glabrous 1.7–2.0 × 0.1–0.15 cm, open flowers10.0–11.0 cm in diameter, white; glabrous peduncles consisting of two internodes, 1.1–1.8 cm long, and 2.8–3.0 cm long; sepals 3, broadly obovate and strongly navicular, 5.8–6 × 3.1–3.5 cm, greenish beneath, glabrous on both sides; petals 6, at least, broadly obovate and strongly navicular, abruptly attenuated, the 3 outer ones 4.5–5 × 6–6.1 cm, white, glabrous in both faces, with a closed pollination chamber involving inner petals only 5.7–6.0 × 2.6–3.3 cm; stamens 40–46, fruitssubglobose to broadly obovoid, glabrous, with 16–22 carpels, these, when mature and open, with almost round oval loci, 1.5–2.0 × 1.2–1.3 cm. Seedsbroadly to narrowly ovoid or prismatic triangular or 0.9–1.1 × 0.6–0.9 cm, with orange sarcotesta.
Ethymology: the species was named after the great canyon in the vicinity of Guadalajara, as Henri Galeotii once name it: “la grande Barranca de Guadalaxara” (McVaugh 1952, Asa Gray Bulletin, Ann Arbor Michigan).
Distribution and habitat: Endemic to the Río Verde canyon, in the municipalities of Zapotlanejo and Ixtlahuacán del Río, Jalisco. Inhabits in steep slopes between 1073 and 1215 m asl, on rocky springs surrounded by tropical dry forest and some mesophytic plants as Oreopanax peltatus, Trema micrantha, Ardisia sp., Aphananthe monoica, Piper sp.
Additional specimens examined. JALISCO. Zapotlanejo municipality: Las Cruces ravine, 30 m down the stream pond and the water pump, 20°44′22.21” N, 103°9′48.01” W, 1215 m, 23 Jan 2012 (fl), Muñiz-Castro, et al.919 (IBUG!). Ixtlahuacán del Río Municipality: North slope of the Barranca del Río Verde, next to a spring, in a mango orchard, 80 m above the river, 1.2 km ENE upriver of the Atengo canyon, 20°44′0.33” N, 103°11′23” W, 1204 m, 23 Feb 2013 (fr), Muñiz-Castro, et al.1161 (IBUG!,)
Magnolia talpanaA. Vázquez, Muñiz-Castro & S. Ortega sp. nov. (Figure 3, third column).
Type: MEXICO. Jalisco: Vicinity of Parque Estatal Bosque de Arce. Municipio Talpa de Allende, 2.1 km SW from Los Sauces 20°14′42”N, 104°47′41”W, 1340 m, 12 Abr 2012 (fr), riparian cloud forest, besides a small tributary stream of the Talpa river. M. Á. Muñiz-Castro & R. Murguía970 (holotype: IBUG, isotype: IPN!).
Diagnosis. Magnolia talpanais similar to M. pacificain sharing ellipsoid fruits with narrow locules during dehiscence, but it differs from the latter in having flowers smaller, 10.0–11.6 vs. 12–14 cm; a tight pollination chamber involving the outer and inner whorl of petals vs. a loose pollination chamber involving the inner whorl of petals only; open sepals narrowly oblongoid, reflexed and opening up to 170 degrees vs. oblongoid, not reflexed and opening less than 90 degrees; inner whorl of petals varying in size vs. subequal; peduncles pubescent vs. glabrous.
Trees of 15.0–25.0 m tall, leaves8.1–14.9 × 5–7.5 cm, acute at the base, acute to obtuse at the apex, glabrous, with 14–15 pairs of lateral veins; stipules linear or conic when young, and abaxially golden pubescent, yellowish green; petioles glabrous, open flowers10–11.6 cm in diameter, white; a tight pollination chamber involving the outer and inner of petals, 4.8 × 2.1–2.7 cm; peduncles of five internodes, the longest is the most distal one, half the length of sepals (ca. 2.5 cm long); sepals 3, narrowly oblongoid, navicular reflexed and opening up to 170 degrees; 4.3–5.5 × 1.4–2 cm, white, glabrous on both sides; petals 6, obovate, navicular, abruptly attenuated, the 3 outer ones 5.2–5.9 × 2.9–3.6 cm, white, glabrous in both faces, the 3 inner whorl of petals subequal, 5.3–6.1 × 2.5–2.8 cm; stamens 74–76; gynoecium 2.1 × 1.0 cm, fruitsellipsoid with narrow locules during dehiscence, immature fruit 2.0 × 1.1 cm. Seedswith red sarcotesta.
Distribution and habitat: Endemic to Talpa de Allende municipality, Jalisco, México, in the east and west branches of the high watershed of the Talpa river and in the Camacho and Desmoronado tributaries of the Tomatlán river, north and above Presa Cajón de Peñas. Inhabiting in cloud forest, riparian forests and ecotones with oak-pine forest.
Additional specimens examined: MEXICO. Jalisco: Municipio Talpa de Allende, 120 m SSW from Peña del Cuervo, 20°13′4.1”N, 104°44′11”W, 2077 m, 16 Jun 2012 (fl), Muñiz-Castro and Murguía-Araiza 1094(IBUG!); Cañada Ojo de Agua del Cuervo (Maple Forest), 18.2 km SSE from Talpa de Allende town, 1751 m, 01 Aug 2012 (fl) Muñiz-Castro et al. 1106(IBUG!); 17–19 km S from Talpa de Allende, margin W of Río de Talpa, 18–19 Oct 1960 (fr), McVaugh 20375(MICH!); 20–22 km S from Talpa de Allende, margin W of Río de Talpa, 28–30 Mar 1965 (fr), McVaugh 23313(MICH!); Cañada Ojo de Agua del Cuervo (Maple Forest), 200 m from the road, 1754 m, 24 Mar 2012 (fr), 20°12′46.5”N, 104°45′25.4”W, Muñiz-Castro et al.941 (IBUG!); path to Coamil de Méndez, tributary of Río Talpa, 2.5 km SW from Los Sauces, 1378 m, 31 Jul 2012 (fr), 20°14′19.1”N, 104°47′48.1”O, Muñiz-Castro, et al. 1103 (IBUG!).
2.2.5 Key to the species of Magnolia in Jalisco.
Stipules adnate to petiole; fruits with connate carpels, circumcissil dehiscence and detachable mainly singly or in small irregular groups (sect. Talauma) … 2.
Free petiole stipules, free carpels, fruit with dorsal dehiscence (sect. Magnolia)
Leaf blades 24.0–25.0 × 11.9–12.6 cm; flowers 22.0 cm diameter, fruits 7.0–10.0 × 5.0–7.0 cm; carpels 47–58; basal carpels 4.3–4.5 × 1.2–1.4 cm and their decurrence from 0.4–0.6 cm long (S of Jalisco and Colima) … M. jaliscana
Leaf blades 35.0–45.0 × 23.0–29.0 cm; flowers 16.0 cm in diameter; fruits 14.5 × 8.5–9.0 cm; carpels 37–44; basal carpels 5–5.7 × 1.5–2 cm and their decurrence from 0.8–2.0 cm long (O of Jalisco) … M. ofeliae
Bract, peduncular internodes and petioles densely pubescent … M. iltisiana
Spataceae bract, peduncular internodes and petioles essentially glabrous or with pubescence limited to the nodes … 4.
Widely obovate sepals (N of Jalisco and S of Zacatecas) … 5.
Narrowly oblong sepals … 6.
Flowers 7.0–8.0 cm in diameter, with a tight pollination chamber; fruit 3.9–5.3 cm, subglobose to broadly obovoid; carpels 24–32, seeds orange … M. granbarrancae
Flowers 11–14 cm in diameter, with a loose pollination chamber, fruit 5.0–7.5, oblongoid to ellipsoid, carpels 16–22, with seeds scarlet red … M. pugana
Pollination chamber subglobose to globose, leaves 13.5–27.8 × 6–14.8 cm, broadly elliptic to elliptic, often obtuse to rounded apex, petals 6–8, carpels 10–19… M. vallartensis
Sepals oblongoid, not reflexed, opening less than 90 degrees, pollination chamber loose and incipient, inner whorl of petals of greatly varying in size … M. pacifica
Sepals narrowly oblongoid, reflexed, opening up to 170 degrees, pollination chamber tight and narrowly oblongoid, inner whorl of petals subequal … M. talpana.
2.3 Genetic structure, diversity, and differentiation
In this section, we review what is known so far of genetic structure and diversity in three western Mexican Magnoliaspecies: Magnolia vallartensis, M. pacificas.l. (including the new species M. talpana), and M. puganas.l. (including the new species M. granbarrancae), all belonging to the so-called Magnolia pacificacomplex [11] (Figure 4). As they are distributed along a continentality and moisture gradient, the influences of their different distances to the Pacific Ocean in their genetic structure and diversity have been tested [18]. In this study, leaf tissues of 278 individuals from 10 localities representative of the M. pacificacomplex were sampled. Three localities were sampled for M. vallartensis: Arroyo Palo María (APM), Las Lajitas (LL), and Provincia (PV); three for M. pacificas.l.: Cerro San Juan (CSJ), San Sebastián del Oeste (SS), and Bosque de Arce (BA, M. talpana); and four for M. puganas.l. Arroyo La Virgen (ALV), Arroyo San Lorenzo (ASL), Arroyo Palo Verde (APV), and Río Verde (RV, M. granbarrancae) (Figure 4). A total of 76 reproducible DNA fragments of six Inter-Simple Sequence Repeats (ISSR) (primers UBC 810, 814, 834, 836, 855, and 857) were amplified and analyzed using Bayesian analysis with the program STRUCTURE, UPGMA clustering, Monmonier’s algorithm with Barrier 2.2, AMOVA, and genetic diversity parameters. Also, a Mantel test was done to evaluate the relationship between genetic and geographic distances.
Figure 4.
Results of Bayesian clustering based on STRUCTURE; analysis performed on a) the entire data set (278 individuals, 76 loci ISSR); b) theM. puganas.l. group (120 individuals); c) theM. pacificas.l.-M. vallartensisgroup (158 individuals). Relationships between K and Delta K values and structure bar plots are shown. Vertical bars represent each individual analyzed and bars are divided into distinct colors when there is evidence of admixture. From [18].
2.3.1 Genetic structure
Results of Bayesian analysis with STRUCTURE (Figure 4), UPGMA clustering (Figure 5), and the Exact Test for differentiation (Table 2) are in accordance that there are two main genetic clusters for the whole of three species, being M. puganas.l. the eastern main group, and the cluster of M. pacificas.l.-M. vallartensisthe western grouping. But each one of these two main groups has its own structure, having two subgroups each (Figures 4 and 5). M. puganas.l. group is segregated in the M. puganas.s. subgroup (ALV-ASL localities), located SW of the Santiago river canyon, and the APV-M. granbarrancae(RV) group, located NE of that canyon. In the other main group, M. pacificas.l. subgroup (BA-SS-CSJ) was separated from the M. vallartensisone (PV-LL-APM). Additionally, the 900 bp (primer 834) and 850 bp (primer 855) ISSR loci only amplified and were exclusive for M. pacificas.l.-M. vallartensisgroup, these loci did not amplify M. puganas.l. samples. The AMOVA based on the three species and the two Bayesian groups showed that only 8% of the genetic variation was explained by differences among species as well as among the Bayesian groups (Table 3), so AMOVA was less informative than the Bayesian analysis. Most of the variation (≥ 82%) was explained by differences within localities, suggesting high levels of cross-pollination [30]. This predominance of outcrossing reproductive mode was also found by [31] in some Neotropical magnolias.
Figure 5.
UPGMA dendrogram showing the genetic relationships of theM. pacificaspecies complex, the number at each node indicates the bootstrap percent having above 50% values. From [18].
M. pugana
M. pacificas.s.
M. vallartensis
APV
RV
ASL
ALV
SS
BA
CSJ
PV
LL
APM
APV
—
0.039
0.051
0.050
0.069
0.057
0.060
0.098
0.097
0.088
RV
0.079
—
0.054
0.052
0.074
0.070
0.073
0.110
0.112
0.088
ASL
0.006
0.001
—
0.032
0.060
0.065
0.050
0.077
0.079
0.072
ALV
0.013
0
0.144
—
0.070
0.069
0.066
0.099
0.097
0.080
SS
0
0
0.002
0
—
0.031
0.030
0.058
0.042
0.049
BA
0.002
0
0
0
0.520
—
0.032
0.065
0.042
0.045
CSJ
0
0
0
0
0.312
0.703
—
0.056
0.042
0.040
PV
0
0
0
0
0.060
0.052
0.050
—
0.039
0.043
LL
0
0
0
0
0.060
0.475
0.119
0.976
—
0.038
APM
0
0
0
0
0.360
0.210
0.162
0.550
0.360
—
Table 2.
Nei’s unbiased genetic distance (above diagonal) and exact test differentiation probability values (below diagonal) among sampled localities of the M. pacificaspecies complex. From [18].
Percentage of variation
Groups
Taxa
Variation source
Bayesian analysis (2)
Taxonomic (3)
M. puganas.l.
M. pacificas.l
M. vallartensis
Among
Taxa / Genetic groups
9 (0.001)
8 (0.001)
Localities
9 (0.001)
8 (0.001)
12 (0.001)
7 (0.001)
7 (0.001)
Within
Localities
82 (0.001)
84 (0.001)
88 (0.001)
93 (0.001)
93 (0.001)
Table 3.
Molecular variance analysis (AMOVA) for Bayesian analysis and taxonomic groups of the Magnolia pacificaspecies complex. From [18].
(2) Two Bayesian groups, (3) three taxa, p value is given in parentheses.
Other evidence for the structure represented by four groups was the results of the test with Monmonier’s algorithm (Barrier 2.2), which detected three significant geographical barriers to gene flow, segregating the four groups (Figure 4). All geographical boundaries had 100% bootstrap support. One of these is the Trans-Mexican Volcanic Belt (TMVB), which is the main physiographic barrier between M. puganas.l. and the group of M. pacificas.l.-M. vallartensis. This mountain range has been identified as an important gene flow barrier for both plants [32, 33, 34, 35] and animals [36, 37], even its complex orogenic processes have led to population isolation, speciation, and diversification [38]. The other two significant barriers detected correspond to the Santiago river canyon on the one hand (between the M. puganas.s. and the APV-M. granbarrancaegroup), and the basins of the rivers Ameca, Mascota, Pitillal, and Cuale on the other hand (between M. pacificas.l. and M. vallartensis). The effect of the deep Santiago river canyon (3–15 km wide and 500–700 m deep) and other river basins as significant gene flow barriers also have been documented for birds, reptiles, insects and other plant species [34, 39, 40].
The outcomes of this population genetics study reveal that M. puganas.l., the easternmost and the most continental group, is the most geographically and genetically distinct group of all M. pacificaspecies complex, and clearly support its recognition at the species level [16]. The most likely process of speciation for M. puganas.s. and M. granbarrancaeis allopatric isolation, being the TMVB the main gene flow barrier between them and their western close relatives. This is in congruence with Vázquez-García et al.[1], who suggest that allopatric speciation is a major driver of Magnoliadiversification in Neotropical Magnoliaceae. The genetic divergence between M. pacificas.l. and M. vallartensisis lesser than between this main group and M. puganas.l., indicating a more recent process of segregation or current gene flow. There is no clear geomorphological barrier between some localities of M. talpanaand M. vallartensisin their southern ranges (between BA and all the M. vallartensislocalities). Therefore, genetic differences between these localities might be rather explained by a process of parapatric ecological differentiation [41, 42], as it is common that gene exchange among closely related taxa happens in at least 25% of plant species [43]. Nevertheless, the four identified genetic groups, independently of partially sharing genes, are distinctive evolutive entities and should be considered as separated conservation units.
2.3.2 Genetic differentiation
Differentiation indices were moderate in general, but higher in M. puganas.l. (GST = 0.120 ± 0.021, D = 0.028 ± 0.007) than in M. pacificas.l.–M. vallartensis(GST = 0.106 ± 0.016, D = 0.026 ± 0.006). The Exact Test for population differentiation showed significant genetic differences between localities of M. puganas.s. and the M. granbarrancae, and between localities of M. puganas.l. and M. pacificas.l.–M. vallartensis, but not within each M. puganasubgroup and within the M. pacificas.l..–M. vallartensisgroup (Table 2). The higher genetic differentiation of M. puganas.l. is in accordance with its smaller, more fragmented, and more isolated populations. The highest distance to the Pacific Ocean of M. puganas.l. causes a lower environmental humidity and more extreme cyclical temperature changes, that is, a greater continentality [44]. These drier and more extreme conditions result in declines, fragmentation, and isolation of M. puganas.l. populations, which need a constant input of water to survive. In contrast, the more humid maritime environments of M. pacificas.l.–M. vallartensisare more favorable to maintain populations of these cloud forest mesophytic species, which is reflected in less isolation and differentiation. Similarly, genetic differentiation has ranged from moderate to high in most Neotropical Magnolia species [31].
2.3.3 Genetic diversity:
M. puganas.l. had lower genetic diversity than the M. pacificas.l.-M. vallartensisgroup. M. puganas.l. exhibited a Shannon Index (I) = 0.268, total heterozygosity (HT) = 0.158 (0.023 SD), and intrapopulation heterozygosity (HS) = 0.134 (0.020 SD). In contrast, M. pacificahad an I = 0.272, HT = 0.175 (0.025), and HS = 0.159 (0.023), and M. vallartensisan I = 0.275, HT = 0.171 (0.024) and HS = 0.153 (0.022). Genetic diversity also varied among localities; M. puganas.l. localities had the lowest genetic diversity (HE = 0.121–0.140, M. granbarrancaehaving the lowest I = 0.218 and H = 0.121), whereas the locality Bosque de Arce (BA) of M. talpanashowed the highest genetic diversity (I = 0.280, HE = 0.17) among the western Magnolialocalities studied. The genetic diversity estimates for all the studied taxa here were lower than the average values reported for plant genetic diversity based on ISSR (H = 0.22) [45], and much lower than those reported for two threatened eastern Mexican Magnoliaspecies: M. sharpiiMiranda [46] (I = 0.56) and M. schiedeanaSchlecht. [47] (I = 0.50) [48]. As with the higher genetic differentiation, the lowest genetic diversity of M. puganas.s. and M. granbarrancaeis consistent with their smaller populations, higher isolation, and fragmentation, all influenced by a drier and more extreme climate.
2.3.4 Isolation by distance pattern
The correlation between geographical and genetic distances among all localities of the M. pacificaspecies complex, revealed by Mantel tests, was high and significant (r = 0.80, p < 0.001), however, when the tests were applied to each of the two main genetic groups separately, no significant correlation was detected. Isolation by distance might explain the genetic structure and differentiation pattern within the M. pacificaspecies complex. Isolation by distance has been a strong pattern observed among plant studies, under this and in rapid environmental change, adaptive responses to environmental stress will be constrained by the natural dispersal mechanisms [49]. Pollination by beetles in small and isolated populations of Magnoliais not very efficient [50], and habitat fragmentation and other anthropogenic factors may also be troublesome for Magnoliaseed dispersal by birds [50, 51]. Even if dispersal occurs, seeds may not germinate or seedlings may not survive in places without enough humidity [52].
In summary, based on ISSR genetic variation, the M. pacificaspecies complex exhibits a population genetic structure composed of two main groups, the eastern M. puganas.l more continental group, and the western M. pacificas.l.-M. vallartensisgroup, with the more maritime climate. Both main groups are segregated by the physiographic barrier of the TMVB and isolation by distance, and are at the extremes of a maritime-continental climatic gradient. M. puganas.s. and M. granbarrancaeare subject to a drier and more extreme climate, therefore having more deforested, fragmented, and isolated habitats, which leads to lower genetic diversity and a higher genetic differentiation. This differentiation within M. puganas.l. and the physiographic barrier of the Santiago river canyon have structured this taxa in two genetic subgroups, M. puganas.s. and the M. granbarrancae. The M. pacificas.l-M. vallartensisgroup exhibited genetic segregation in two subgroups, having several canyon river barriers between both taxa, but maintaining a partial gene flow at their southern ranges. The three species of the M. pacificacomplex have lower genetic diversity than eastern Mexican Magnoliaspecies which are considered as endangered. Even more, the eastern and more continental M. puganas.s. and M. granbarrancaeundergo the lowest genetic diversity, which, together with their smaller and more isolated populations, makes these populations more vulnerable to gene drift and bottlenecks, therefore greater risk of extinction. All main genetic groups and subgroups defined in this study should be considered as separate conservation units, and concerted efforts are needed to protect them.
2.4 Phenological divergence
Phenology aims to characterize the behavior and the biological adaptation of the species in its natural habitats, which may help guide important management conservation strategies. We studied three different species of Magnolia(M. vallartensis, M. pacificas.l., M. puganas.l.) in western Mexico (Figure 1). Phenological observations were made at monthly intervals for one year and four months. The phenophases (flowering and fruiting) in an annual cycle and the intensity of each phenological event were estimated using the Fournier intensity index. The sum of all the intensity categories assigned to each individual was divided by the maximum amount that could be attributed to the population (relativizing the total number of selected individuals with the total sum sampled per month). Circular statistics were used to analyze and interpret phenological patterns. Using the statistical package Oriana version 4.0, the months were converted into angles, with intervals of 0.999° to 30° wide and it was calculated: 1) average angle (μ) or average date that refers to the time of the year around which the phenological activity of individuals is more concentrated; 2) circular standard deviation; and 3) the vector r, which indicates the intensity of the concentration (0 to 1) around the average angle. The length of the vector r can be considered a measure of the degree of seasonality. In addition, the Rayleigh test was applied to indicate the significance (P < 0.05) of the mean angle.
The synchrony of the flowering phenophase between populations or species is essential to detect possibilities of gene flow between species and existence of temporary barriers in reproductive phenophases. Since the incipient asynchrony observed in the flowering of the three species was linked to their amplitude of flowering (which lasts up to six weeks with significant intersection) it was considered insufficient to prevent gene flow. The hypothesis of non-seasonality in the phenophases of the three species was rejected, which was high in M. pugana, intermediate in M. pacificaand low in M. vallartensis.
The flowering (female-flower) phenophase showed an incipient asynchrony among species, being earlier in Magnolia vallartensis(end of May), intermediate in M. pacifica(second week of June), and late in M. pugana(end of June). Seasonality was high in M. pacificaand M. pugana[20] (Figure 6). This incipient asynchronous female-flower phase differs from some Colombian Magnoliaspecies, in which flowering is commonly markedly asynchronous among species and populations of each species [53].
Figure 6.
Circular histograms of two phenophases for the threeMagnoliaspecies. A. Flowering (female-flower) phenophase. B. Fruiting phenophase. Based on monthly averages of frequencies from January to December 2017.Magnolia vallartensis(I), left column,M. pacifica(II), central column andM. pugana(III), right column. The arrows represent significant average angles (Rayleigh test p < 0.001), while the length of the vector r (0 to 1) indicates the concentration around the average angle [20].
The fruiting phase was asynchronous among species, and showed high seasonality only for Magnolia pugana(February) while in M. vallartensisthe maximum fruiting was in August and for M. pacificain December (Figure 6). This pattern is similar to that reported for Leucaenasp. and Guazuma ulmifoliaLam. [54, 55], a possible strategy to reduce competition among potential seed dispersers of Magnoliaincluding birds, rodents and lizards. The intensity of fruiting is concentrated in rainy seasons [53]. Fruit dehiscence of Magnolia vallartensis, M. pacificaand M. puganashowed an asynchronous pattern between species. Similarly, eight species with an asynchronous pattern are reported for pioneer species in the central Amazon region of Brazil [56].
Differences in productivity were also evident, the higher productivity of reproductive phenophases (flowering and fruiting) of Magnolia puganacompared to that of M. pacificaand M. vallartensismakes it possible to reject the hypothesis of no significant differences. These differences may be due to their evident genetic differences [18], but also to their environmental differences; for instance, M. puganapopulations thrive in permanent streams, surrounded by tropical deciduous forest and open oak-pine woodlands, a condition that provides more sunlight that can help to keep their reproductive phenophases more productive (flowers and fruits), whereas in the case of M. vallartensisand M. pacifica, their populations are usually surrounded by high and dense canopy cloud forest and tropical semi-evergreen forest trees that overshadow many Magnoliatrees, which limits their productivity due to the scarcity of sunlight along the year.
2.5 Floral scents
More recently, several ecological studies have examined the roles of floral scent in the biology of the plant [57]. Scents, essential oils, or volatiles are secondary metabolites produced by plants to fulfill protection functions against herbivores, phytopathogens, and even other plants [58, 59]. These form a complex matrix with a lipophilic-volatile nature [60], from a chemical point of view, these volatile compounds belong to chemical classes such as terpene derivatives (oxygenated or hydrocarbons), phenylpropanoids, benzenoids, and nitrogen-containing compounds [61, 62]. The combinations of the constituents of this scent mixture give each flowering plant species a unique fragrance [57]. Through a compilation of data, the genus Magnolia,has been reported to be an interesting source of secondary metabolites found both in plant extracts and in essential oils, as shown by studies carried out mainly in species distributed in Asia and in which applications in traditional medicine are included [63, 64, 65]. In this sense, in many of the endemic species, studies related to describing the metabolic composition as a complement to determine potential uses, contribute to knowledge, and improve the conservation of their habitats. As an example, we extracted and characterized for the first time the essential oils present in flowers of M. vallartensis, M. pacificaand M. pugana, three endemic species of the genus Magnoliaalong a continenrtality and moisture gradient in western Mexico [19].
2.5.1 Methods
For details of flower collection techniques, essential oils extraction and determination of floran scents chemical composition see Mendeley Data repository [66].
2.5.2 Comparisons
The yield of essential oils from flowers of these three Magnolia spp.(Table 4) showed that in general these vegetal parts present a similar low yield between 0.2 to 0.3%. On the other hand, the chemical composition of oils showed qualitative differences among individual components. The chemical profiles of these scents analyzed by GC/MS, observed in Figure 7, identified 97 compounds in total between species; 63 in M. vallartensis, 53 in M. pacificaand 39 in M. pugana.
Specie
Flower mass (g)
Essential oil (mL)
Yield
Odor
M. pacifica
100
0.22
0.21%
Sweet, citric
M. vallartensis
100
0.24
0.25%
Sweet, citric
M. pugana
100
0.30
0.30%
Sweet, woody
Table 4.
Essential oils of Magnoliaflowers: Yield and organoleptic characteristics.
Figure 7.
Floral scents chemical profiles by gas chromatography:A) M. vallartensis, B) M. pacifica,and C)M. pugana.
In the chromatograms differences evidenced, in a specific manner, on the major components. Within the chemical composition of floral essential oils the major compounds greater than 3% of the total components obtained for each species from the most abundant were as follows. In the case of M. pacifica, (caryophyllene, bicyclo-dec-1-ene, 2-isopropyl-5-methyl-9-methylene, bicyclogermacrene, β-elemene and epi-cyclocolorenone); for M. vallartensis(caryophyllene, geranyl methyl ether, β-elemene and caryophyllene oxide); and in M. pugana(cyclocolorenone; 2Z,6E-farnesol; benzoic acid (5,5-dimethyl-4-oxo-2-cyclohexenyl ester, β-elemene, and caryophyllene oxide). Chemical composition data has an interesting application when essential oils occurrence is studied in the field of taxonomy. This assesses the possible chemotaxonomic relationship between chemical compounds and species, identifying compounds that could act as indicators. Based on this idea, the results obtained by a point-to-point analysis throughout the 90-minutes chromatograms and comparing the mass spectra including trace components, a matrix was constructed (Figure 8).
Figure 8.
Matrix of chemical compounds present inMagnoliafloral scents.
The presence of compounds could be associated to the closely related taxonomic affinity confirmed trough molecular phylogenetic analysis; for example analyzing other three species closely related: M. schiedeana, M. grandifloraL. [67] and M. tamaulipana[11]; the pair M. schiedeana-M. tamaulipana(both endemic from Mexico) share the presence of geranyl methyl ether as the major compound up to 87%, while in M. grandiflora(widely distributed in the southern North America) shows the presence of its precursor: geraniol [68]. In this way, it was determined that the floral scents of the endemic species M. pacifica, M. vallartensisand M. puganashare qualitatively 14 components in their chemical profile, which is equivalent to 14.46% of total; these components suggested that could act as chemical markers for a determination at the gender level. Otherwise, floral oil compounds shared by pairs of species were also founded, the pair M. pacifica-M. vallartensisshared 27 more compounds of the total (42.47%); M. vallartensis-M. pugana2 more compounds of the total (16.49%); and M. pacifica-M. puganajust one more additional compound to the total (15.46%). In the case of components particularly present in each species, M. puganahad 22 compounds, M. vallartensis20 and M. pacifica11 components. The Jaccard similarity index allowed inferring the qualitative composition, the pair M. pacifica- M. vallartensisshow the strongest similarity about 54.6%, while with M. puganathese species showed 19.5% and 18.6% of similarity respectively. The essential oils of flowers of M. pacifica, M. vallartensisand M. puganashowed a composition rich in sesquiterpenes with significant differences in their composition. Most species of Magnoliapossess distinctive floral scent profiles, even though they may be taxonomically closely related, the chemical differences among these taxa may have arisen from interaction with pollinators or the environment [69]. There are factors that can affect the chemical composition and quality of an essential oil such as the age of the plant, altitude, climate, genetics, geography, type of soil [70]. For this reason, it is necessary to continue with studies focused on establishing the relationships between the components and relating the chemotaxonomic field including more Magnoliaspecies populations to conform a robust database that provides the necessary information to correlate chemical markers and to become a useful tool in species classification in addition to genetic analysis. These applications can help promote strategies in the conservation of this genus and its habitat.
2.6 Pre-germination treatments and seed dormancy
The most important and critical stage during the development of the plants is germination; therefore, it is also for the natural repopulation of the species and the dynamics of the populations [71]. The ability of a seed to germinate is known as viability, that is, the embryo is alive and can remain so for some time. A viable seed with dormancy is one that cannot germinate under any condition of physical environmental factors (humidity, temperature, light/dark, etc.), which are otherwise favorable for germination [72]. Therefore, the success of germination depends on whether or not the seeds have a dormancy mechanism, on their viability and on the time needed for them to germinate [73].
Magnoliaseeds have viability percentages ranging from 50–100% [74, 75]. Different studies have shown a low percentage of germination because they can present different types of dormancy (including physical, chemical, mechanical, physiological and morphological) [76]. To eliminate dormancy and increase the percentage of germination and produce the greatest number of Magnoliaseedlings, different pre-germination procedures have been applied [77, 78, 79, 80]. This section will present the research carried out in Magnolia iltisiana, M. pacifica, M. puganaand M. vallartensis, to know the viability percentages and the different most successful pre-germination treatments, to break the lethargy and increase germination.
2.6.1 Seed management and germination
Seeds must be collected from 10 different plants of ripe fruit and extracted manually. To prevent fungal infection, a contact fungicide (Captan) was used for the seeds of M. iltisiana[81], while the other species were rinsed in a 3% sodium hypochlorite solution for 30 minutes. It is recommended that after being collected and disinfected, they are immediately stored in a well-ventilated and humid environment inside a refrigerator at 4–5°C, to avoid dehydration [76].
Were used 100 seeds per treatment with five replicates of 20 seeds per container for the four species. Once the treatments were concluded seeds of M. pacifica, M. puganaand M. vallartensiswere sown inside a greenhouse at the Centro Universitario de Ciencias Biológicas y Agropecuarias (CUCBA) and were buried at 1.5 cm depth in 25 ml plastic containers. The substrate used for planting was “peat-moss” [29]. The study of M. iltisianawas carried out in the experimental greenhouse of Las Joyas Scientific Station (ECLJ), and they were planted in a mixture of sand and “germinaza” (1:1) as substrate. The number of germinated seeds was recorded daily for 60 days [75]. Seeds were considered to have germinated when the radicle emerged or when the hypocotyl was observed [82, 83].
2.6.2 Viability tests
The percentage of viability of all species was determined through tests in a 1% tetrazolium solution; two replicates of 50 seeds were used for M. iltisiana, while for the other species it was in 30 seeds. The seeds were immersed without aril in this solution for 24 hours at 30°C, in darkness [72]. After this time, they were cut transversely and the tissues were observed in a stereoscope. What were stained in deep red is considered viable, while those not, are considered unviable (Figure 9) [84].
Figure 9.
Staining of seed tissues with tetrazolium in the viability test inMagnolia pugana: a) viable seed, and b) non-viable seed.
The viability is 80% for M. iltisiana, this result agrees with what was found in [77] where they obtained 80% of viable seeds in M. schiedeana. While the seeds of M. puganaregistered 67% [76]. Reference [75] reported that in species of the same genus from southern North America it has an average of 50% viability, similar results are found in M. vallartensisand M. pacificawith 50% and 53% respectively (Figure 10). These percentages are lower than those recorded in other Magnoliaspecies. For example, in [74] found 100% viability in seeds of M. dealbataZucc. [85]. In Ref. [80] obtained 92% for M. perezfarreraeA. Vázquez & Gómez-Dominguez [86] and 87.5% in M. sharpii.
2.6.3 Pre-germination treatments, germination tests, and dormancy types
Four treatments were used for M. iltisiana[81]. In M. puganasix treatments were carried out [76]. Three treatments were performed for M. pacificaand M. vallartensis[87]. The germination of M. iltisiana, M. pacifica, M. puganaand M. vallartensis,is of the epigeal type, the embryo developed a pair of foliaceous cotyledons, a flaccid fatty endosperm, a hypocotyl and a radicle, confined to the micropile area [76, 81, 87], (Figure 11).
Figure 11.
Germination process ofM. pugana:a) exposure of the endosperm and hypocotyl, b) elongation of the hypocotyl and cotyledon, c) leaf cotyledons and testa flushing, d) seedling with leaf primordia exposed above ground.
In general, the percentage of germination obtained for M. iltisiana, M. pacifica, M. puganaand M. vallartensisare low. The highest germination recorded are 60%, 21%, 52% and 12%, respectively. In these studies, it is found that for M. pacifica, cold stratification treatment promoted the highest number of germinated seeds. Similar results have been obtained in [77] for M. schiedeana, with this same treatment with 84% germination. Another important finding is that the manual aryl removal treatment for M. iltisiana, M. pugana,and M. vallartensisare the most successful. These results coincide with those of reference [80] reported for M. perezfarrerae(64%) and M. sharpii(73%) with the mechanical scarification treatment (i.e., the seeds are placed in purified water and then the aril is manually removed). This treatment also proved to be effective with 90–100% germination in seeds of M. dealbata[74] and M. champaca(L.) Baill. ex Pierre [88] (73%) under the same treatment [89].
Low germination rates (< 70%) may indicate that the seeds are dormant and cannot be broken [90]. The results in these studies suggest that cold stratification treatments and manual aryl removal may indicate the presence of physiological and chemical dormancy, respectively [72]. Taken together, these results are consistent with reference [29] who recommends that Magnoliaseeds undergo stratification periods so that immature embryos can develop, while in Ref. [91] reported that Magnoliaceae aryls contain inhibitors that delay germination.
On the other hand, it has been proven that the use of phytohormones is a promoter of germination with physiological dormancy [72]. Conversely, it was found that the phytohormone treatments used in the experiments on M. iltisianaand M. puganadid not increase the germination percentage, suggesting that the seeds of these species do not possess physiological dormancy. Although the seeds of M. iltisianahave chemical dormancy, physical dormancy is also identified, that manifests itself through the development of a lignified testa that prevented the absorption of water, and the third type of dormancy is mechanical, which in this case the head exerted too much pressure on the embryo, delaying germination [81]. In the studies conducted for M. pacifica, M. puganaand M. vallartensisit was found that seeds do not have physical dormancy because they have the capacity to absorb water [76, 87] (Table 5).
Climate change is an important driver for future distributions of tree species, as it is expected to modify environmental conditions critical for plant populations maintenance. An analysis of 40 species of North American tree species from the temperate zone [92] revealed the higher vulnerability to climate change for the species growing in a colder climate, including the high-elevation mountain trees. In tropical mountain landscapes of Andes, the changes in habitat suitability are expected to be of a mixed character, while favorable for some tree species they may be prejudicial for others, with an overall general increase of species risk of extinction found in approximately 20% of tree species [93]. The increase of the risk of tree species extinction from climate change is related to the projected scale of the climate zones shift, which is highly variable across the globe [94]. In the situation of the terrain with complex irregular topography the extent of habitat suitable for species may be particularly sensitive to climate change [95], as the habitat tolerances of the mountain flora are generally narrow and the distribution shift upwards in the mountains frequently means the reduction of populations. At the same time, the complex topography may offer the high heterogeneity of habitat, which could provide opportunities for emerging local refugia, detectable at a fine spatial scale [96]. In the case of Magnolia, the narrow distribution ranges of species may constitute a risk factor, that could lead to the disappearance of the suitable habitat in some of the climatic projections for the end of the 21st century, as it was found in the case of the Andean species M. mercedesiarumD.A. Neill, A. Vázquez & F. Arroyo [97, 98].
An important step in the assessment of tree species vulnerability and extinction risk in the climate change scenarios is the analysis of habitat suitability dynamics. The habitat suitability belongs to the core concepts of the ecological niche theory, particularly of great importance in the field of plant ecology, as plants cannot evade adverse environmental conditions by sheltering or migrating within the single generation [99]. The assumption that healthy plant populations stay in the equilibrium with the contemporary or recent environmental conditions is central for accessing habitat suitability through niche modeling and projecting [100]. The climatic envelope models are a particular class of habitat suitability and niche models that uses the climatic variables as an approximation to the maximal extent of the habitat suitable to support species [101]. This class of models is widely used for the analysis of species-climate relations in the current climate, and for the heterochronic studies using past and future climate strata, as well as for predicting species distributions.
After accepting the equilibrium assumption, we used the field observations of the presence of three Magnoliaspecies to develop the corresponding climatic envelope models, which captured the range of the environmental conditions that are suitable for species persistence in time and space. Further projections of the habitat suitability in the climate change scenarios in the next 80 years allowed us to detect the probable habitat suitability changes for Magnoliaspecies, and to evaluate species vulnerability to climate change.
3.1.1 Methods
The species presence dataset of three taxa of the Magnolia pacificacomplex [M. pacificas.l. (including M. talpana), M. puganas.l. (including M. granbarrancae), and M. vallartensis] was compiled from herbarium specimens at IBUG, IEB, ZEA, WIS, MEXU, XAL, MO, MICH, field observations cited in taxonomic literature [11, 13, 16], virtual images at Naturalista [102]. Monthly averaged climatic variables from WorldClim 2.1 dataset [103] available for the recent past (1970–2000) were taken as an approximation to current conditions, while the future conditions under two CO2 emission scenarios were taken from the downscaled projections of the general circulation model CanESM5 [104]. The detailed description of the species distribution modeling procedure and predictions are available in Mendeley Data repository [66].
3.1.2 Results and discussion
As it was expected, the climatic envelope models recovered the suitable habitat extent larger than the known species distributions. The reasons of the overestimation are discussed in Shalisko et al.[66]. However, in the continental scale, the high suitability was predicted close to the occurrence records, the most distant grid cells identified as suitable were separated from known species occurrence sites in less than 150 km. The estimated suitable for the species presence zone in 1970–2000 varied from 9560 km2 for M. vallartensisto 23940 km2 for M. puganas.l. (Figure 12). The suitable areas were well separated from another two species in the case of M. puganas.l.,overlapped with M. pacificas.l. In the case of the M.6vallartensisthe estimated overlap of potentially suitable habitat with that of M. pacificas.l. was of 4053 km2, which equals to 42% of the entire high suitability zone for M. vallartensis.
Figure 12.
Areas of habitat suitability higher than ESS threshold in at least 50% of cross-validation runs of the climatic envelope model for recent (1970–2000) climatic conditions. The key map on the left part shows the location of the right frame within North America.
Despite the systematic overestimation of the suitable area, the climatic envelope models are useful for the evaluation of the species vulnerability to climate change, as the same bias applies to the prediction of habitat suitability in current conditions and future projections. The changes in the area with suitable conditions may be proportional to the changes in true potential distribution.
The dynamics of suitable area in SSP2–4.5 scenario [105] (Figure 13) was favorable for M. puganas.l., as the size of the potentially suitable area in 2080–2100 was about 13% larger than in current conditions, and almost all grid cells labeled as suitable in recent past persist at the end of 21st century. The models for both M. pacificas.l. and M. vallartensispredicted suitable habitat reduction which is particularly fast in the second half of the century, with loss of about 45% of the suitable habitat in the case of the former species and 53% in the least. Interestingly, in the current climatic conditions, the habitat suitability for M. vallartensiswas found to be high not only in the locations close to the known distribution, but also in the separate coastal zone northwards, and the persistence of the habitat suitability in future scenarios was higher in the northern area, where species observations are unknown. In the case of M. pacificas.l.the future high habitat suitability in SSP2–4.5 scenario was predicted roughly in the same geographic zones as was identified for current conditions.
Figure 13.
Areas of habitat suitability higher than ESS threshold in at least 50% of cross-validation runs of the climatic envelope model for projected future (2080–2100) climatic conditions under SSP2–4.5 and SSP3–7.0 scenarios. Symbology and extent is the same as inFigure 12.
The baseline SSP3–7.0 scenario [105] produced habitat suitability projections that are concerning in terms of species survival (Figure 13). In the case of three species, the fast decline in habitat suitability was predicted from the middle of the century, resulting in a loss for the end of the century of 66% of the suitable area in the case of M. puganas.l., dramatic 92% loss of habitat suitable for M. pacificas.l. and complete disappearance of the habitat of M. vallartensis.
The uncertainty associated with habitat loss projections remained high due to the limitations of climatic envelope modeling and the uncertainty from global circulation models and CO2 emission scenarios. However, the general trend of probable habitat loss for M. pacificas.l.and M. vallartensisdetected in the analysis was not compromised by accounting for the uncertainty, as the similar trend of change between current conditions and projections for the end of the 21st century was found in the 95% confidence intervals. In the case of M. puganas.l. the likely habitat suitability change cannot be interpreted as the sign of significant risk when taking into consideration the prediction uncertainties.
Similarly to reference [95] interpretation of the effect of habitat suitability reduction in the species survival, we consider that the risk of species extinction from habitat loss may be overestimated when the data was analyzed in coarse-scale, as the local small size refugia were excluded from consideration. The true vulnerability of species to climate change depends on several factors outside of the scope of the current analysis. Tree populations may have a lag in reaction to climate change as the long-living sessile organisms [106]. The result of this lag could be the absence of the immediate disappearance risk for adult tree individuals, that could successfully tolerate significant environmental stress, but the reduction of the reproductive success required for the populations maintenance. In many species of the North American trees, the observed distribution is not entirely concordant with the current climate, as the long-living organisms may present the ‘extinction debts’ and ‘colonization credits’ at some parts of their actual or potential ranges [106]. In the case of Magnoliaspecies, the lag between the loss of the climatic suitability and the actual population disappearance may be at least several decades required for the eventual death of adult representatives of the populations. Another aspect that was not accounted for in the vulnerability analysis is the possibility of the wide environmental tolerance within the populations that were not manifested in the current biotic and abiotic conditions, but that could contribute to species survival in climate change scenarios.
More than 350 Magnoliaspecies have been described worldwide, and of a total of 314 that have been evaluated in their conservation status, 48% (147 sp.) have been classified as threatened with extinction in the wild [107]. However, there are still 34% of Magnoliaspecies that have not been evaluated mainly due to data deficiencies, despite that Magnoliaconservation has become a major international task [108]. Therefore, in this section, we present an evaluation of the conservation status of the three western Mexican Magnoliaspecies (section Magnolia) that have been evaluated so far [18], to propose and implement conservation measures.
4.1.1 Methods
Conservation status assessment.The threatened status of M. pacificas.s., M. talpana, M. puganas.s., M. granbarrancae, M. vallartensis,and M. iltisianawere assessed here using the IUCN Red List Criteria (criteria B1ab + B2ab, [109]) and the GeoCAT cloud software tool [110]. The Extent of Occurrence (minimum convex polygon, EOO) and the Area of Occupancy (grid cell area with occupancy, AOO) of each taxon were delimited from georeferenced records obtained from IBUG herbarium specimens, the GBIF, Tropicos.org, REMIB-CONABIO, REBIOMEX databases, and field data. AOO was based on the IUCN default cell width of 2 km. The criterion C-2 (Genetics) of the Method of Extinction Risk Evaluation of Plants in Mexico (MER) from the Mexican Official Norm 059 [111] was used to contribute partially to the MER assessment. Criterion C-2 proposes that (1) if the population has heterozygosity (He) < 10–20% (depending on the molecular marker used) and (2) a genetic differentiation (Gst or Fst) > 20%, it has a higher threatened status or extinction risk.
4.1.2 Results and discussion
The estimated EOO (km2) and AOO (km2) were: for M. puganas.s. =1,259.3, 96, respectively; M. granbarrancae = 0.7, 12; M. pacificas.s. =1,216.2, 72; M. talpana = 91.8, 32; M. vallartensis = 124.0, 44; and M. iltisiana = 19,444.2,196 (Table 6). These western Mexican Magnoliaspecies are in an endangered status because of their higher fragmented populations, lower genetic diversity, and narrower extent of occurrence when compared with other threatened Magnoliaspecies [48].
Relevant conservation data to guide establishing conservation priorities for Magnoliasection Magnoliain western México. EOO: Extent of occurrence, AOO: Area of occupancy.
M. granbarrancaeand M. talpanahave extremely narrow geographical ranges (EOO < 100 km2) that are in accordance with the IUCN criteria for the category of Critically Endangered species: B1ab (iii, v). Populations of these species are small and severely fragmented (criterion B1a), and present a continuing decline in the area, quality of habitat [criteria B1b (iii)], and number of mature individuals [criteria B1b (v)] [109]. Moreover M. granbarrancaefulfill with the IUCN criterion C1 for Critically Endangered species, having a known total number of 74 mature individuals for the species, and an estimated or projected continuing decline of at least 25% in the next three years because the flooding of its habitat by the construction of the El Zapotillo damp on the Río Verde.
The genetic diversity of a species is an important indicator of its conservation status due to its positive correlation with the capacity to adapt and overcome abiotic and biotic changes. The genetic diversity of the three species studied here is considered lower than the average (H = 0.22) [45], and it is even lower than that of M. sharpii(I = 0.56), a species categorized as endangered because of its narrow EOO (2,228 km2), severely fragmented and degraded habitats, and the fact that it is known from only five locations [48, 107]. M. puganatogether with M. granbarrancaehad a total heterozygosity HT of 0.158, M. pacificatogether with M. talpana, of 0.175, and M. vallartensisof 0.171, this low genetic diversity of the three species is in accordance with criterion C-2 (intrinsic biological vulnerability with genetic heterozygosity <20%) of the Mexican Standard NOM-059-SEMARNAT MER for being considered in the category of Endangered species [111].
The IUCN criteria do not consider the levels of genetic diversity and differentiation for assessing extinction risk, but M. puganaand M. granbarrancaesuffer of very low genetic diversity [11] and very low number of individuals, so these two species should be categorized as Critically Endangered even when M puganas.s. has an area of occupancy of 96 km2. It is noteworthy that despite M. puganas.s. EOO and AOO are in accordance with the IUCN Endangered category, their highly fragmented and isolated small populations suffering a seasonal dry and extreme climate, and its low genetic diversity make consider this species as Critically Endangered. M. puganas.l. (including M. granbarrancae) has even lower genetic diversity and higher genetic differentiation than the other western Mexican Magnoliaspecies studied. This fact, together with the fact of having more fragmented, more isolated, smaller populations, and being surrounded by a seasonally drier environment [103], make M. pugana s.s.and M. granbarrancaebe proposed to be included in the category of Critically Endangered of extinction, as it had been previously cataloged by [112] for M. puganas.l.
Magnolia vallartensisshould also be considered as Critically Endangered, as it has been categorized by [107], due to having an EOO of only 124 km2, low number of individuals, high deforestation rates, forest plagues and fires, fragmentation, climate change, cattle raising, roads and urban growth. Both, the EOO and the AOO of M. pacificas.s. are in accordance with the IUCN category of Endangered (EOO <5,000 km2 and AOO <500 km2). Furthermore, in the case of M. pacificas.l. (including M. talpana) and M. vallartensisthe extent of occurrence is projected to suffer a severe reduction in the next 80 years as a consequence of the shrinkage of the areas of high habitat suitability, estimated under the highly probable SSP3–7.0 and less probable SSP2–4.5 scenarios. The scope of the projected extent of occurrence reduction in the case of M. vallartensismay bear this species into the critically endangered status by the end of the century [criteria B1b (i, iii)]. In the case of M. pacificas.l. the projected reduction of the area of suitable habitat for the end of the century is highly significant, however, may be not enough to move species to the critically endangered category by using only this criterion.
Despite M. iltisianahas an AOO <500 km2 (196), and that it has some populations with severe fragmentation, as those near Morelia city (in Michoacán), several populations of this species do not have severe fragmentation and inhabit in the protected area of Sierra de Manantlán Biosphere Reserve. Therefore M. iltisianashould maintain its category of Vulnerable, as it has been suggested by [107].
Magnolia granbarrancaewhich is located to the northeast side of the Santiago river canyon (composed by the RV locality), M. puganas.s. (composed by ALV, ASL and APV), and the populations of M. pacificas.s., M. talpanaand M. vallartensisshould be considered as five separate units of conservation. The implementation and enforcement of in situand ex situconservation actions should protect and preserve at least one locality of each population of M. puganas.s., and M. granbarrancae, as well as the most divergent localities of M. pacificas.s. (CSJ and SS), M. talpana(BA) and M. vallartensis(PV and APM). The BA locality of M. talpana(“Bosque de Arce”, maple forest) conserve the highest genetic diversity, which coincides with being one of the most important forests in terms of plant species richness, endemism, and floristic composition for western Mexico [113, 114]. Greater efforts must be made to preserve all of these taxa, and a higher focus is required to protect M. puganas.s and M. granbarrancae, characterized by low levels of genetic variation and highly fragmented and small populations. All these Magnoliaspecies must be fully evaluated with the MER method for inclusion in the list of endangered species of the official Mexican Standard NOM-059. Education, conservation, management, and ecological restoration plans are badly needed to decrease their threatened status and raise awareness of the fate of these important species in extinction risk.
4.2 Propagation and reintroduction
Magnolias, like other plant species, may be reproduced both sexually (by seeds) and asexually (through plant tissues).
4.2.1 Sexual reproduction
This kind of propagation involves genetic recombination, which provides a genetic variability that improves the plant’s ability to adapt to its environment [29, 115], ensuring that long-term survival by reducing the risk of suffering a bottleneck effect, which puts a species in danger of extinction [116]; Also, more vigorous seedlings are generated and the propagation is easier and cheaper than asexual reproduction, on the other hand, the plants take longer to reach maturity and bloom. In section “2.6 Pre-germination and seed dormancy treatments” of this chapter, the aspect of sexual reproduction in magnolias of Western Mexico is addressed more extensively.
4.2.2 Asexual propagation
Asexual reproduction has been only reported for M. tamaulipanaof sect. Magnoliaand for species of sect. Macrophylla. Asexual propagation occurs through stems, shoots and roots and is more convenient for horticultural purposes, where it is sought to preserve certain characteristics through generation of clones and flower faster than those propagated by seeds [29], however, the methods used are more expensive and transportation is more complicated [117]. Although no studies have been conducted on vegetative propagation in the Mexican magnolias of the sect. Magnolia, we list the most used horticultural methods for the Magnoliagenus [29, 117]:
4.2.2.1 Cuttings
This approach has the advantage of reducing costs in large-scale production and the plants obtained are more uniform, but to ensure survival it is necessary to have better-equipped facilities and develop specific protocols for Neotropical magnolias. Method for cuttings in Magnoliacould be found in the following references: [29, 117, 118].
4.2.2.2 Layering
It is recommended when you want to get only a few plants. Produces larger plants in a shorter period of time, but requires more space and labor [29]. More information about this technique can be avaible in the following references [29, 117, 118].
4.2.2.3 Harnpariphan’s technique.
Here named as such, is an intermediate cutting-layering technique. In the cutting a reed incision is made 5 cm above the basal cut, a small piece of plastic is inserted between the reed and the stem to ensure an acute angle separation. A paste with fungicide and rooting hormone (1:1) is applied to the exposed sides of the incision. Subsequently, the wound area is covered with a substrate, securing it as layering with a piece of plastic tied at the ends with ropes. A small segment is cut from the basal part of the cutting-layer in water, to ensure that the air does not interrupt the flow of water through the conductive vessels. The basal part must be in contact with the water and the covered region of the wound must remain in the air, taking care to always keep the layering moist, making sure that the plastic has small holes that allow the excess water to drain. Leaf areas with lesions or infections should be trimmed and the water always kept fresh by making replacements when necessary [117].
4.2.2.4 Grafting
It is an easy and cheap method but requires more space, labor and time. Recommended for species and cultivars difficult to root [29], the graft should be done between genetically closest species since there is better long-term compatibility [119]. It is a great alternative for threatened species with low fertility [117]. For major types of grafts of magnolias see the following references: chip-budding [29, 118], side-grafting [29], wedge or cleft grafting [117], crown grafting [117], canutillo graft [117], shield budding [117], patch budding [117], and approach grafting [117].
4.2.2.5 Tissue culture
It involves the regeneration of a whole plant from a small portion taken from any part of a parent plant, producing enormous quantities of plants from a few cells. This method, in particular, represents a difficult and expensive task, coupled with the fact that some species may be more difficult to propagate by this means, a situation that is attributed to the high content of phenolic acid in magnolias, which can inhibit the growth of the crop, requiring frequently change the explant to a fresh medium, it has also been observed that magnolias tend to generate vitrified growth under tissue culture, which does not generate roots and rarely reverts to normal growth [29]. Phenolic acid content is lower in magnolias after dormancy is broken, so it is better to use dormant branches to obtain explants [120]. More information about this technique can be found in Refs. [29, 120, 121].
4.2.3 Reintroduction
The goal of reintroduction is to establish a viable population of any species in the wild and is essential to increase its long-term survival and to reestablish key species in an ecosystem and restore its natural biodiversity, so it must be carried out within the area of distribution and primitive natural habitat of the target species [122]. For a reintroduction to be successful, it should be considered the awareness of the population and community participation, the planting time and composition of the individuals in quantity and quality (Figures 14 and 15). It must be ensured that the site has the appropriate biotic and abiotic requirements for the species in all its life stages, considering seasonal and post-establishment needs, continuous monitoring and management is required to provide feedback [123]. In the case of magnolias, it has been found that they belong to an intermediate and late-successional state, so reintroduction and reforestation projects must consider planting individuals under a pre-existing plant cover [124]. In tropical magnolias, no tolerance to prolonged dry seasons has been found, so to plant them, humid regions, well-drained sites with slightly acidic soils (pH close to 6) and little compacted should be chosen [117]. For transplantation to the ground, reference [117] recommends loosening the soil first, taking care not to injure any roots when removing them from the bag, always keeping the soil moist, adding mulch around the stem to keep moisture and avoid weeds, and, in case of if necessary, apply dilute phosphoric acid to lower the soil pH.
Figure 14.
Course-workshop on conservation challenges forMagnoliaconservation in the subdeciduous forest of the Nahuan community of Ayotitlán, in the sierra de Manantlán, western México. Photos by A. Vázquez-García.
Figure 15.
Left: Reintroduction ofMagnolia puganaby Dra. Rosa Romo and her assistants near arroyo san Nicolas. Central: Plantation ofMagnolia ofeliaeat the campus of UDG-CUCBA, Zapopan, by the kids: Alberto Aguilar and Quetzalcóatl Vázquez. Right: Urban plantation ofMagnolia mexicanaat Jardínes Alcalde, Guadalajara by Jesús Cortés and Paula Cortés. Photos by M. Muñiz-Castro and A. Vázquez-García.
4.3 In-situ and ex-situ conservation
4.3.1 In-situ conservation proposals
Of the six species of Magnoliasect. Magnoliafive of them have populations within Protected Natural Areas; M. iltisianais located within the Sierra de Manantlán Biosphere Reserve, a federally protected area, while M. talpanais located within the Bosque de Arce State Park and M. granbarrancaein the Natural Formation of State Interest Barrancas de los Ríos Santiago y Verde, M. pacificahas one of its populations in the Sierra de San Juan Ecological Reserve in Nayarit and in the Cuenca Alimentadora del Distrito Nacional de Riego 043 (APRN-CADNR-043), and M. puganahas populations within the La Primavera Flora and Fauna Protection Area and in the Natural Resources Protection Area of Cuenca Alimentadora del Distrito Nacional de Riego 043 (APRN-CADNR-043, southern Zacatecas polygons). However, for some of these species it is necessary to establish additional measures for their protection [13].
In the case of M. pacifica, it is important to create a protection zone in its type locality, in San Sebastián del Oeste, Jalisco, where it is currently threatened and its population has been reduced by deforestation, agricultural expansion and mining. For M. pugana, it is proposed to create a protection zone in the perimeter of Arroyo La Virgen, which is located near Rancho San Nicolás in Zapopan, Jalisco. This stream has relict elements of cloud forest, so declaring it a Protection Area would benefit the conservation of other species such as Populus luziarumA. Vázquez, Muñiz-Castro & Padilla-Lepe [125] (CR), an endemic species found only in two Zapopan ravines.
With M. vallartensis, it is recommended to decree a protection zone in the Palo María stream basin, since it is one of its main distribution sites in addition to having other endemic species such as Pinus vallartensisPérez de la Rosa & Gernandt [126] and Miconia vallartensisZabalgoitia, Figueroa & Muñiz-Castro [127], which would contribute significantly to the conservation of Puerto Vallarta’s biodiversity. In this particular case, the importance of establishing a protection zone and rescuing this species also rests on the fact that this species was declared an emblematic tree of the Municipality from which it bears its name, Puerto Vallarta.
Although all these species, except for the new ones described here, are under some risk category of the IUCN Red List, at the national level, only one of them, M. iltisiana, is found in the Official Mexican Norm NOM-059 on Environmental Protection for native species of flora and fauna; low genetic diversity of M. granbarrancae(Rio Verde locality), M. pacificas.s., M. talpana, M. puganas.s., and M. vallartensis, agrees with the C-2 criterion of NOM-059 MER [18], therefore that it would be appropriate to integrate them into this Norm as Endangered species.
It is vitally important to create integrated management and conservation strategies according to each species, which include reaching stakeholders of the communities where these magnolias are distributed since the first step is to increase conservation awareness and foster appropriation of their natural resources. An example is a Workshop held by some of the authors of this chapter in the Nahua community of Ayotitlán, where M. jaliscanais located, in which they taught about the importance of conserving magnolias and of its propagation, as well as the importance of ecosystem services (Figure 14).
Alternatively, Wildlife Conservation Management Units (UMA for its acronym in Spanish) can be created in which, in addition to conserving the site, the owner obtains benefits through the sustainable use of its natural resources and can be beneficiaries of subsidies for the conservation and sustainable use of wildlife native at UMA [128].
Property owners can also be creditors of the Payment for Environmental Services (PES), which is a program whose purpose is to promote the recognition of the value of the services provided by ecosystems by creating a market for them [129].
4.3.2 Ex-situ conservation
The ex-situ conservation centers aim to reduce the risk of extinction of threatened species and act as a complement to in-situ conservation by supporting wild populations with the reintroduction of specimens and restoration of habitats, acting as gene banks, promoting research and continuing to raise social awareness as elements of diffusion and environmental education [130]. For Magnolia, there are 9,918 ex-situ records of 152 Magnoliaceae species, however less than half of the most threatened taxa are represented [107], Latin America and the Caribbean region are of particular concern because many of their endemic Magnoliaceae are not represented in ex-situ collection [131]. In Jalisco, some of the Magnoliaex-situ collections for 2020 are here presented (Table 7), and particularly the species of sect. Magnoliadiscussed in this chapter are cultivated.
Species
University of Guadalajara, Zapopan
Vallarta Botanic Garden
National Center of Genetic Resources, Tepatitlán
M. dealbata
0
0
1
M. grandiflora
11
1
1
M. iltisiana
0
2
0
M. jaliscana
1
0
0
M. mexicana
0
0
1
M. oaxacensis
0
3
0
M. ofeliae
2
4
0
M. pacifica
17
38
0
M. pugana
180
29
0
M. rzedowskiana
0
1
0
M. tarahumara
80
35
0
M. vallartensis
14
5
0
Table 7.
Magnolia ex-situ collections from Jalisco, Mexico. M. mexicanaDC. [132], M. oaxacensisA. Vázquez [14], M. rzedowskianaA. Vázquez, Domínguez-Yescas & Pedraza-Ruiz [133], M. tarahumara(A. Vázquez) A. Vázquez [15].
In March 2020, a Magnolia Conservation and Propagation Workshop was held in the Nahua community of Ayotitlán, in which a small greenhouse was installed so that the community could reproduce M. jaliscana, currently, they have 20 seedlings (Figure 14).
4.3.2.1 Plantations of M. pugana
Dr. Rosa de Lourdes Romo Campos has dedicated herself for several years to the conservation of M. pugana, which has led to a series of reintroduction plantations for this species, whose origin is from San Lorenzo, Zapopan. These plantations can be located in the map (Figure 1) with a tree symbol. In 2013 two plantations were carried out, one in the “Los Colomos” urban forest and another near the “Balneario El Encanto” in Zapopan, Jalisco, both with 50 plants; in 2016 one plantation with 30 individuals were made near highway San Cristobal de la Barranca-Tesistán; in 2018 one plantation with 25 trees was carried out in “Los Colomos” urban forest and another with 200 individuals in San Esteban, Zapopan, Jalisco was executed; in 2020 only one plantation was made in Parques de Tesistán, Zapopan, with 18 trees.
The Magnolia pacificaspecies complex shows high morphological divergence and displays a remarkable pattern of allopatric radiation, where the species are distributed among five biogeographic provinces and or separated by canyons, along an elevational, latitudinal and continentality or moisture gradient. This is demonstrated by the two newly described taxa, including: M. granbarrancae, confined to the 500 m deep and narrow Rio Verde canyon, in the vicinity of Guadalajara city and M. talpanaconfined to the southern portion of the Talpa de Allende municipality, Jalisco, in the high watersheds of the ríos Camacho, Desmoronado and Talpa. Further fieldwork is needed in northern Nayarit, Sinaloa, Durango, Sonora and Chihuahua to enhance our understanding of the morphological divergence of this species complex.
The genetic structure of the Magnolia pacificaspecies complex exhibits two main groups separated along a moisture gradient by the Transmexican Volcanic Belt province and by distance. The western more maritime group differentiated into two genetic subgroups M. pacificas.s. and M. vallartensis, and the eastern most continental group differentiated into two genetic subgroups M. puganas.s. and M. granbarrancae. M. puganas.l. is subject to a drier and more extreme climate, therefore having more deforested, fragmented, and isolated habitats, which leads to lower genetic diversity and a higher genetic differentiation. This differentiation and the physiographic barrier of the Santiago river canyon have structured M. puganas.l in the two subgroups, M. puganas.s. and M. granbarrancae. The M. pacificas.s-M. vallartensisgroup exhibits genetic segregation in two subgroups, M. vallartensisand M. pacifica, separated by several canyon river barriers, but maintaining a partial gene flow at their southern ranges. The three species of the M. pacificacomplex have lower genetic diversity than eastern Mexican Magnoliaspecies which are considered as endangered. All main genetic groups and subgroups defined in this study should be considered as separate conservation units, and concerted efforts are needed to protect them.
Similar to other basal angiosperm lineages, beetle pollination has been associated with the Magnoliaceae, however, we have documented that hymenopterans could also play a significant role as pollinators in some species as demonstrated in Magnolia vallartensis,being pollinated by meliponid bees. The pollination efficiency between Hymenoptera and Coleoptera needs to be assessed.
Flower showed an incipient asynchrony, insufficient to prevent gene flow, while fruiting had a marked asynchrony among the three species, suggesting specialization by reducing competitors and enhancing dispersal. Flowering seasonality was significant for M. pacificaand M. puganawhile fruiting seasonality was significant only for M. pugana. In terms of productivity M. puganahad a significantly higher productivity than M. vallartensisor M. pacifica, despite this large productivity, there is little or no recruitment of juveniles.
Floral scents in the three studied species of Magnolia pacificacomplex display distinctive floral scent profiles, the chemical differences may have arisen from interaction with pollinators or the environment. The Jaccard similarity index between M. pacifica- M. vallartensiswas 54.6%, while with M. puganathese showed 19.5% and 18.6% of similarity respectively. It is necessary to continue with studies focused on establishing the relationships between the components and the chemotaxonomic field including more Magnoliaspecies populations to conform a robust database.
The conservation status of the western Mexican Magnoliaspecies are currently as endangered status because of their highly fragmented populations, low genetic diversity, and narrower extent of occurrence compared with other threatened Magnoliaspecies. But it is noteworthy that M. puganas.l. group has even lower genetic diversity and higher genetic differentiation than the other western Mexican Magnoliaspecies. This fact, together with the fact of having more fragmented, more isolated, smaller populations, and being surrounded by a seasonally drier environment, make M. puganaa candidate species to be included in the category of Critically Endangered, as it had been previously cataloged.
Climate change scenarios projected in the next 80 years suggest high vulnerability for two species (M. pacificaand M. valartensis). The area of high habitat suitability is expected to abruptly reduce for both species, which may result in persistence of populations only within the small local refugia, which are located within the extent of the current high suitability area. The species in-situ preservation effort may be particularly important in the areas that were found to have high habitat suitability in the climate change scenarios.
Given that there is still little knowledge on insect floral visitors and the floral biology of most Magnoliaspecies, further studies including more field observations are needed. Studies of seed predation and dispersal are also highly recommended to understand the apparent lack of recruitment of juveniles.
The results of the percentages of viability differ from those of germination in M. iltisiana, M. pacifica, M. puganaand M. vallartensis. Therefore, it is necessary to continue with the studies of seed ecology, to determine whether there are other types of dormancy as morphological or morpho-physiological, as has been detected in other species of Magnolia. Considering that the highest percentage of germination is achieved with the manual removal of the aril, for its low cost and in greenhouse conditions, it can be a successful practice for the propagation of seedlings of these species, which help reforestation and restoration of their populations in their natural environment.
We dedicate this chapter to the distinguished Professor of Natural Sciences Dr. Enrique Estrada Faudón, from University of Guadalajara, the western Mexican “Humboldt” for leading since 1985, the first large-scale propagation of Magnolia puganato prevent extinction. To the University of Guadalajara (UDG), Centro Universitario de Ciencias Biológicas y Agropecuarias, Botanic Gardens Conservation International and Fondation Franklinia. Especially thanks to Dr. Adriana Natividad Avedaño López, Sergio Misael Gallegos Mendoza and Weerakit Harnphariphan for their support and advice in conducting this research. This work was supported by Secretaría de Educación Pública (SEP-México) through its PRODEP program PROMEP-NPTC/103.5/12/3418, through its PRO-SNI program and the P3E 2013-2018 project of CUCBA (UDG). We are grateful to Bob Price, Neil Gerlowski, Ralph Osborne†, from Vallarta Botanical Gardens, members of the Magnolia Society International, Global Conservation Consortium Magnolia (GCCM) and Toribio Quintero Moro from Ayuntamiento de Talpa de Allende for financial and or logistical support. To Patricia Castro-Félix, Anne Santerre, Ahtziri Socorro Carranza Aranda, Mario Ruiz López, J. Luis Navarrete Heredia, Alma Rosa Villlobos for their research collaboration. To supporters in field explorations: Abel Puente Casillas, Alejandro Zabalgoitia, Ana Teresa Nuño Rubio, Heriberto Justo Nieves, Jesús Padilla-Lepe, Jesús Truijillo, Miguel Cházaro, Ricardo Díaz Borioli, Rosa Murguía Araiza and Saúl Cristobal Gabriel.
References
1.Vázquez-García JA, Neill D, Asanza M, Pérez ÁJ, Arroyo F, Dahua A, et al. Magnolias de Ecuador: En Riesgo de Extinción. Universidad Estatal Amazónica; 2016. 143 p
2.Domínguez-Yescas R, Vázquez-García JA. Flower of the heart,Magnolia yajlachhi(subsect.Talauma,Magnoliaceae), a new species of ceremonial, medicinal, conservation and nurse tree relevance in the Zapotec culture, Sierra Norte de Oaxaca, Mexico. Phytotaxa. 2019;393(1):21–34. doi: 10.11646/phytotaxa.393.1.2
3.Jussieu AL. Genera plantarum. 1789. 281 p
4.Linnaeus C. Species plantarum. Stockholm: Salvius; 1753. 560 p
5.Wang Y, Liu B, Nie Z, Chen H, Chen F, Figlar RB, et al. Major clades and a revised classification ofMagnoliaand Magnoliaceae based on whole plastid genome sequences via genome skimming. J Syst Evol. 2020;58(5): 673–95. doi: 10.1111/jse.12588q
6.Nooteboom HP. Magnoliaceae. In: Kubitzki K, Rohwer JG, Bittrich V, editors. Flowering Plants Dicotyledons. The Families and Genera of Vascular Plants, vol 2. Berlín: Springer; 1993. p. 391–401
7.Hebda RJ, Irving E. On the origin and distribution of magnolias: Tectonics, DNA and climate change. GMS. 2004;145:43–57
8.Figlar RB, Nooteboom HP. Notes on Magnoliaceae IV. Blumea-Biodiversity, Evol Biogeogr Plants. 2004;49(1):87–100
9.García-Morales LJ, Iamonico D, García-Jimenez J. Nomenclatural remarks onMagnoliasect.Macrophylla(Magnoliaceae), with description of a new species from North America (Tamaulipas, Mexico). Phytotaxa. 2017;309(3):238–44. doi: 10.11646/phytotaxa.309.3.4
10.Baillon HE. Mémoire sur la famille des Magnoliacées. Adansonia. 1866;7:1–16,65–69
11.Vázquez-García JA.Magnolia(Magnoliaceae) in Mexico and Central America: a synopsis. Brittonia. 1994;46:1–23. doi: 10.2307/2807454
12.Vázquez-García JA, Pérez-Farrera MÁ, Goméz-Domínguez H, Muñiz-Castro MÁ, Sahagún-Godínez E.Magnolia montebelloensis, a new species in sectionMagnoliafrom Lagunas de Montebello National Park, Chiapas, México, with a key to Magnoliaceae of Chiapas. Phytotaxa. 2017;328(2):101–14. doi: 10.11646/phytotaxa.328.2.1
13.Muñiz-Castro MÁ, De Castro-Arce E, Iltis HH, Guzmán-Mejía R, Cuevas-Guzmán R, Murguía-Araiza R,et al. Magnolias de Jalisco [Internet]. Guadalajara: Universidad de Guadalajara; 2019. 48 p. Available from:https://www.magnoliamexico2019.org/node/6
14.Vázquez-García JA, Muñiz-Castro MÁ, De Castro-Arce E, Murguía Araiza R, Nuño Rubio AT, Cházaro-Basañez M de J. Twenty new neotropical tree species ofMagnolia(Magnoliaceae). In: In: Salcedo-Pérez E, Hernández-Álvarez E, Vázquez-García JA, Escoto-García T, Díaz-Echavarría N, editors. Recursos Forestales en el Occidente de México: Diversidad, Manejo, Producción, Aprovechamiento y Conservación Tomo I. México: Universidad de Guadalajara; 2012. p. 91–130
15.Vázquez-García JA, Muñiz-Castro MÁ, Arroyo F, Pérez AJ, Serna M, Cuevas Guzmán R, et al. Novelties in Neotropical Magnolia and an addendum proposal to the IUCN Red List of Magnoliaceae. In: Salcedo-Pérez E, Hernández-Álvarez E, Vázquez-García JA, Escoto-García T, Díaz-Echavarría N, editors. Recursos Forestales en el Occidente de México: Diversidad, Manejo, Producción, Aprovechamiento y Conservación Tomo II. México: Universidad de Guadalajara; 2013. p. 461–96
16.Vázquez-García JA, Carvajal S, Hernández L. L.Magnolia pugana(Magnoliaceae): A new combination in the complexM. pacifica. Novon. 2002; 12(1):137–141. doi: 10.2307/3393253
17.Morrone JJ, Escalante T, Rodriguez-Tapia G. Mexican biogeographic provinces: Map and shapefiles. Zootaxa.2017;4277(2):277–9. doi: 10.11646/zootaxa.4277.2.8
18.Muñiz-Castro MÁ, Castro-Félix P, Carranza-Aranda AS, Vázquez-García JA, Santerre A. Population genetics, species boundaries, and conservation in theMagnolia pacificaspecies complex along a continentality and moisture gradient in western Mexico. Bot Sci. 2020;98(3):500–516. doi: 10.17129/botsci.2551
19.Osorio Muñoz EA. Identificación química y perspectiva medicinal de los aceites esenciales de hojas, semillas y flores deMagnolia pugana. Universidad de Guadalajara; 2020
20.Dahua-Machoa NA. Temporalidad de fenofases y micropropagación in vitro de tres especies relictuales deMagnoliadel Occidente de México: implicaciones para su conservación in situ y ex situ. Univesidad de Guadalajara; 2018
21.Crepet WL, Friis EM. The evolution of insect pollination in angiosperms. In: Friis EM, Chaloner WG, Crane PR, editors. The origins of angiosperms and their biological consequences. England: Cambridge University Press; 1987. p. 181–201
22.Bernhardt P. Convergent evolution and adaptive radiation of beetle-pollinated angiosperms. Plant Syst Evol. 2000;222:293–320. doi: 10.1007/BF00984108
23.Thien LB, Kawano S, Azuma H, Latimer S, Devall MS, Rosso S, et al. The floral biology of the Magnoliaceae. In: Hunt DR, editor.Magnoliasand their allies. Egham, Surrey, U. K.: Royal Holloway, University of London; 1996. p. 37–58
24.Burmeister H. Handbuch der Entomologie, vol. 4, part 1. TCF Enslin, Berlin. 1844;586
25.Cresson ET. Descriptions of New Species of North American Bees. Proc Acad Nat Sci Philadelphia. 1878 Sep;30: 181–221
26.Kevan PG, Viana BF. The global decline of pollination services. Biodiversity. 2003;4(4):3–8. doi: 10.1080/14888386.2003.9712703
27.Potts SG, Biesmeijer JC, Kremen C, Neumann P, Schweiger O, KuninWE. Global pollinator declines: trends, impacts and drivers. Trends Ecol Evol. 2010;25(6):345–53. doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2010.01.007
28.Vásquez-Morales SG, Sánchez-Velázquez LR, Pineda-López R. Las semillas de la magnolia. La ciencia y el hombre. 2010;23(3):37–40
29.Callaway DJ. The world of magnolias. Portland, USA: Timber Press; 1994. 260 p
30.Hamrick JL, Godt MJW. Allozyme Diversity in Plant Species. In: Plant Populaiton Genetics, Breeding, and Genetic Resources. 1990
31.Veltjen E, Asselman P, Hernández Rodríguez M, Palmarola Bejerano A, Testé Lozano E, González Torres LR, et al. Genetic patterns in NeotropicalMagnolias(Magnoliaceae) usingde novodeveloped microsatellite markers. Heredity. 2019;122:485–500. doi: 10.1038/s41437-018-0151-5
32.Sosa V, Ruiz-Sanchez E, Rodriguez-Gomez FC. Hidden phylogeographic complexity in the Sierra Madre Oriental: The case of the Mexican tulip poppyHunnemannia fumariifolia(Papaveraceae). J Biogeogr. 2009;36(1):18–27. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2699.2008.01957.x
33.Ruiz-Sanchez E, Rodriguez-Gomez F, Sosa V. Refugia and geographic barriers of populations of the desert poppy,Hunnemannia fumariifolia(Papaveraceae). Org Divers Evol. 2012;12:133–43. doi: 10.1007/s13127-012-0089-z
34.Ruiz-Sanchez E, Specht CD. Influence of the geological history of the trans-mexican volcanic belt on the diversification ofNolina parviflora(Asparagaceae: Nolinoideae). J Biogeogr. 2013;40(7):1336–47. doi: 10.1111/jbi.12073
35.Ruiz-Sanchez E, Ornelas JF. Phylogeography ofLiquidambar styraciflua(Altingiaceae) in Mesoamerica: Survivors of a Neogene widespread temperate forest (or cloud forest) in North America? Ecol Evol. 2014;4(4):311–28. doi: 10.1002/ece3.938
36.Bryson RW, García-Vázquez UO, Riddle BR. Phylogeography of Middle American gophersnakes: Mixed responses to biogeographical barriers across the Mexican Transition Zone. J Biogeogr. 2011;38(8):1570–84. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2699.2011.02508.x
37.Bryson RW, Riddle BR. Tracing the origins of widespread highland species: A case of Neogene diversification across the Mexican sierras in an endemic lizard. Biol J Linn Soc. 2012;105(2):382–94. doi: 10.1111/j.1095-8312.2011.01798.x
38.Mastretta-Yanes A, Moreno-Letelier A, Piñero D, Jorgensen TH, Emerson BC. Biodiversity in the Mexican highlands and the interaction of geology, geography and climate within the Trans-Mexican Volcanic Belt. J Biogeogr. 2015;42(9):1586–600. doi: 10.1111/jbi.12546
39.Bryson RW, Murphy RW, Lathrop A, Lazcano-Villareal D. Evolutionary drivers of phylogeographical diversity in the highlands of Mexico: A case study of theCrotalus triseriatusspecies group of montane rattlesnakes. J Biogeogr. 2011;38(4):697–710. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2699.2010.02431.x
40.Bryson RW, García-Vázquez UO, Riddle BR. Diversification in the Mexican horned lizardPhrynosoma orbiculareacross a dynamic landscape. Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2012;62(1):87–96.doi: 10.1016/j.ympev.2011.09.007
41.Nosil P. Ecological Speciation. Oxford University Pres. 2015
42.Anacker BL, Strauss SY. The geography and ecology of plant speciation: Range overlap and niche divergence in sister species. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci. 2014;281(1778). doi: 10.1098/rspb.2013.2980
43.Mallet J. Hybridization as an invasion of the genome. Trends in Ecology and Evolution. 2005;20(5):229–37.doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2005.02.010
44.Snow R. Continental climate and continentality. In: Encyclopedia of Earth Sciences Series. Dordrecht: Springer. 2005
45.Nybom H. Comparison of different nuclear DNA markers for estimating intraspecific genetic diversity in plants. Mol Ecol. 2004;13(5):1143–55. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2004.02141.x
46.Miranda F. Anales del Instituto de biología de la Universidad nacional de México. An del Inst Biol la Univ Nac México. 1955;26:79, f. 1–3
48.Newton AC, Gow J, Robertson A, Williams-Linera G, Ramírez-Marcial N, González-Espinosa M,et al. Genetic variation in two rare endemic mexican trees,Magnolia sharpiiandMagnolia schiedeana. Silvae Genet. 2008;57(6):348–56
49.Sexton JP, Hangartner SB, Hoffmann AA. Genetic isolation by environment or distance: Which pattern of gene flow is most common? Evolution (N Y). 2014;68(1):1–15. doi: 10.1111/evo.12258
50.Chen Y, Chen G, Yang J, Sun W. Reproductive biology ofMagnolia sinica(Magnoliaecea), a threatened species with extremely small populations in Yunnan, China. Plant Divers. 2016;38(5):253–8. doi: 10.1016/j.pld.2016.09.003
51.Oppel S, Mack AL. Bird assemblage and visitation pattern at fruitingElmerrillia tsiampaca(Magnoliaceae) trees in Papua New Guinea. Biotropica. 2010;42(2):229–35. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-7429.2009.00572.x
52.José AC, Da Silva EAA, Davide AC, Melo AJS, Toorop PE. Effects of drying rate and storage time onMagnolia ovataSpreng. seed viability. Seed Sci Technol.2011;39(2):425–34. doi: 10.15258/sst.2011.39.2.14
53.Gómez Restrepo ML. Fenología reproductiva de especies forestales nativas presentes en la jurisdicción de Corantioquia, un paso hacia su conservación. Medellín: CORANTIOQUIA; 2010. 132 p
54.Lamarck J-B de M. Encyclopédie méthodique: botanique, vol 3. chez Panckoucke; 1789. 52–53 p
55.Núñez-Cruz A, Meave JA, Bonfil C. Reproductive phenology and seed germination in eight tree species from a seasonally dry tropical forest of Morelos, Mexico: Implications for Community-Oriented Restoration and Conservation. Trop Conserv Sci. 2018;11. doi: 10.1177/1940082917749946
56.Bentos T V., Mesquita RCG, Williamson GB. Reproductive Phenology of Central Amazon Pioneer Trees. Trop Conserv Sci. 2008;1(3):186–203. doi: 10.1177/194008290800100303
57.Cseke LJ, Kaufman PB, Kirakosyan A. The Biology of Essential Oils in the Pollination of Flowers. Nat Prod Commun. 2007;2(12):1317–36. doi: 10.1177/1934578X0700201225
58.Pergentino de Sousa D. Bioactive Essential Oils and Cancer [Internet]. de Sousa DP, editor. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2015. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-19144-7
59.Robustelli della Cuna FS, Calevo J, Bari E, Giovannini A, Boselli C, Tava A. Characterization and Antioxidant Activity of Essential Oil of Four Sympatric Orchid Species. Molecules. 2019;24(21):3878. doi: 10.3390/molecules24213878
60.Can Baser K, Buchbauer G. Handbook of Essential Oils: Science, Technology, and Applications [Internet]. Can Baser K, Buchbauer G, editors. CRC Press; 2009. Available from:https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/9781420063165
61.Tisserand R, Young R. Essential Oil Safety: A Guide for Health Care Professionals. 2nd ed. Elsevier - Health Sciences Division; 2014. 784 p
62.Azuma H, Toyota M, Asakawa Y. Intraspecific Variation of Floral Scent Chemistry inMagnolia kobusDC. (Magnoliaceae). J Plant Res. 2001;114(4):411–22. doi: 10.1007/PL00014006
63.Shen Y, Li C, Zhou S, Pang E, Story D, Xue C. Chemistry and Bioactivity of Flos Magnoliae, A Chinese Herb for Rhinitis and Sinusitis. Curr Med Chem. 2008;15(16):1616–27. doi: 10.2174/092986708784911515
64.Park C, Park S-Y, Lee S, Kim J, Park S. Analysis of Metabolites in White Flowers ofMagnolia denudataDesr. and Violet Flowers ofMagnolia liliifloraDesr. Molecules. 2018;23(7):1558. doi: 10.3390/molecules23071558
65.Sarker S, Maruyama Y. Magnolia The genusMagnolia. London, UK: Taylor & Francis; 2002. 191 p
66.Shalisko V, Vázquez-García JA, Muñiz-Castro MA, Hernández-Vera G, Ortega-Peña AS, Dahua-Machoa A; Osorio-Muñoz EA, Jacobo-Pereira C. Supplementary materials for the chapter How to save endangered magnolias? From population biology to conservation action: the case of allopatric radiation in western Mexico, Mendeley Data, v2. [Internet]. 2021. Available from:http://dx.doi.org/10.17632/jkx452rt9p.2
67.Linnaeus C. Systema naturae. Editio Dec. Vol. 2. Stockholm Laurentii Salvii; 1759. 1082 p
68.Azuma H, Rico-Gray V, García-Franco JG, Toyota M, Asakawa Y, Thien LB. Close Relationship between Mexican and ChineseMagnolia(Subtropical Disjunct of Magnoliaceae) Inferred from Molecular and Floral Scent Analyses. Acta Phytotaxon Geobot. 2004;55(3):167–80
69.Azuma H, Thien LB, Kawano S. Molecular Phylogeny ofMagnolia(Magnoliaceae) Inferred from cpDNA Sequences and Evolutionary Divergence of the Floral Scents. J Plant Res. 1999;112 (3):291–306. doi: 10.1007/PL00013885
70.Buckle J. Basic Plant Taxonomy, Basic Essential Oil Chemistry, Extraction, Biosynthesis, and Analysis. In: Clinical Aromatherapy [Internet]. Elsevier; 2015. p. 37–72. Available from:https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/B9780702054402000036
71.Harper JL. Population Biology of Plants. London: Academic Press; 1977. 892 p
72.Baskin CC, Baskin JM. Seeds: Ecology, biogeography, and, evolution of dormancy and germination. London: Academic Press. 2014
73.Vázquez-Yanes C, Orozco-Segovia A. Physiological Ecology of Seed Dormancy and Longevity. In: Tropical Forest Plant Ecophysiology. Boston: Springer. 1996. p.535–58
76.Jacobo-Pereira C, Romo-Campos R, Flores J. Germinación de semillas deMagnolia pugana(Magnoliaceae), especie endémica y en peligro de extinción del occidente de México. Bot Sci. 2016;94(3):575–84. doi: 10.17129/botsci.512
77.Vásquez-Morales SG, Sánchez-Velásquez LR. Seed ecology and pre-germinative treatments inMagnolia schiedeanaSchlecht, an endangered species from México. J Food, Agric Environ. 2011;9(1):604–8
78.Fernando MTR, Jayasuriya KMGG, Walck JL,Wijetunga ASTB. Identifying dormancy class and storage behaviour of champak (Magnolia champaca) seeds, an important tropical timber tree. J Natl Sci Found Sri Lanka. 2013;41(2):141–6. doi: 10.4038/jnsfsr.v41i2.5708
79.Iralu V, Upadhaya K. Dormancy, storability, and germination of seeds inMagnolia punduana(Magnoliaceae). Botany. 2016;94(10). doi: 10.1139/cjb-2016-0056
80.Vásquez-Morales SG, Ramírez-Marcial N. Seed germination and population structure of two endangered tree species:Magnolia perezfarreraeandMagnolia sharpii. Bot Sci. 2019;97(1):2–12. doi: 10.17129/botsci.1977
81.Saldaña-Acosta A, Zuloaga-Aguilar MS, Jardel-Peláez EJ. Germinación deAcer skutchiiRehder yMagnolia iltisianaVázquez en la reserva de la Biosfera Sierra de Manantlán, Jalisco, México. For Veracruzana. 2001;3(2):1–8
82.Bewley JD, Bradford KJ, Hilhorst HWM, Nonogaki H. Seeds: Physiology of development, germination and dormancy, 3rd edition. New York: Springer. 2013. 392 p
83.Ogawa M, Hanada A, Yamauchi Y, Kuwahara A, Kamiya Y, Yamaguchi S. Gibberellin biosynthesis and response during Arabidopsis seed germination. Plant Cell. 2003;15(7):1591–604. doi: 10.1105/tpc.011650
84.ISTA. International Rules Seed Test. 2016. 384 p. doi: 10.15258/istarules.2016.F
85.Zuccarini JG. Plantarum novarum. Königlich Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften; 1836. 2:315–380
86.Vázquez-García JA, Gómez-Domínguez H, López-Cruz A, Espinosa-Jiménez JA, Sahagún-Godínez E, Muñiz-Castro MA.Magnolia perezfarrerae, a new species and a key to Mexican species of Magnolia (sectionTalauma, subsectionTalauma, Magnoliaceae). Bot Sci. 2013;91(4):417–25. doi: 10.17129/botsci.421
87.Gallegos-Mendoza SM, Ortega-Peña AS, Jacobo-Pereira C, Vazquez-García JA. Pruebas de germinación en semillas deMagnolia pacifica(A. Vazquez) yM. vallartensis(A.Vázquez & Muñiz-Castro). In Guadalajara, México: Consortium and Symposium for the Conservation of Neotropical Magnolias; 2019. 1 p
88.Pierre JBL. Flore forestière de la Cochinchine. 1880;1:pl. 3
89.Candiani G, Galetti M, Cardoso VJM. Seed germination and removal ofMichelia champacaL. (Magnoliaceae) in eucalypt stands: the influence of the aril. Rev Árvore. 2004;28(3):327–32. doi: 10.1590/S0100-67622004000300002
90.Flores J, Arredondo A, Jurado E. Comparative seed germination in species ofTurbinicarpus: An endangered cacti genus. Nat Areas J. 2005;25(2)
91.Dirr MA, Heuser CW. The Reference Manual of Woody Plant Propagation: From Seed to Tissue Culture. Athens: Varsity Press. 1987
92.Rogers BM, Jantz P, Goetz SJ. Vulnerability of eastern US tree species to climate change. Glob Chang Biol. 2017;23(8):3302–20. doi: 10.1111/gcb.13585
93.Garavito NT, Newton AC, Golicher D, Oldfield S. The relative impact of climate change on the extinction risk of tree species in the montane tropical Andes. PLoS One. 2015;10(7):e0131388. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0131388
94.Beck HE, Zimmermann NE, McVicar TR, Vergopolan N, Berg A, Wood EF. Present and future Köppen-Geiger climate classification maps at 1-km resolution. Sci Data. 2018;5(1):180214. doi:10.1038/sdata.2018.214
95.Thuiller W, Lavorel S, Araújo MB, Sykes MT, Prentice IC. Climate change threats to plant diversity in Europe. PNAS. 2005; 102(23):8245–50. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0409902102
96.Randin CF, Engler R, Normand S, Zappa M, Zimmermann NE, Pearman PB, et al. Climate change and plant distribution: Local models predict high-elevation persistence. Glob Chang Biol. 2009;15(6):1557–69. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2486.2008.01766.x
97.Vázquez-García JA, Shalisko V, Barragán-Reynaga DM, Villalobos-Arámbula AR, Anguiano M. Probable habitat disappearance in climate change scenarios for recently discovered Ecuadorian endemicMagnolia mercedesiarum. Serna M, editor. Aportes para la gestión del riesgo y cambio climático. 1ra ed. 2018;15–33
98.Vázquez-García JA, Neill DA, Shalisko V, Arroyo F, Merino-Santi RE.Magnolia mercedesiarum(subsect.Talauma, Magnoliaceae): a new Andean species from northern Ecuador, with insights into its potential distribution. Phytotaxa. 2018;348(4):254–68. doi: 10.11646/phytotaxa.348.4.2
99.Hirzel AH, Le Lay G. Habitat suitability modelling and niche theory. Journal of Applied Ecology. 2008;45(5):1372–81. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2008.01524.x
100.Franklin J. Mapping species distributions: Spatial inference and prediction. Cambridge University Press; 2010. 320 p
101.Araújo MB, Peterson AT. Uses and misuses of bioclimatic envelope modeling. Ecology. 2012; 93(7):1527–39. doi: 10.1890/11-1930.1
102.CONABIO, National Geographic Society, California Academy of Sciences. Naturalista
103.Fick SE, Hijmans RJ. WorldClim 2: new 1-km spatial resolution climate surfaces for global land areas. Int J Climatol. 2017;37(12):4302–15. doi: 10.1002/joc.5086
104.Swart NC, Cole JNS, Kharin VV, Lazare M, Scinocca JF, Gillett NP, et al. The Canadian Earth System Model version 5 (CanESM5.0.3). Geosci Model Dev. 2019;12:4823–73. doi: 10.5194/gmd-12-4823-2019, 2019
105.Eyring V, Bony S, Meehl GA, Senior CA, Stevens B, Stouffer RJ, et al. Overview of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) experimental design and organization. Geosci Model Dev. 2016;9:1937–58. doi: 10.5194/gmd-9-1937-2016, 2016
106.Talluto M V, Boulangeat I, Vissault S, ThuillerW, Gravel D. Extinction debt and colonization credit delay range shifts of eastern North American trees. Nat Ecol Evol. 2017;1:1–6
107.Rivers M, Beech E, Murphy L, Oldfield S. The red list of Magnoliaceae-revised and extended. First edit. Botanic Gardens Conservation International; 2016. 63 p
108.Cires E, De Smet Y, Cuesta C, Goetghebeur P, Sharrock S, Gibbs D, et al. Gap analyses to support ex situ conservation of genetic diversity inMagnolia, a flagship group. Biodivers Conserv. 2013;22:567–90. doi: 10.1007/s10531-013-0450-3
109.IUCN Standards and Petitions Committee. Guidelines for using the IUCN Red List categories and criteria. Vers 14. [Internet]. 2019. Available from:http://www.iucnredlist.org/documents/RedListGuidelines.pdf
110.KEWRoyal Botanic Gardens. GeoCAT Geospatial Conservation Assessment Tool. IUCN, KEWRoyal Botanic Garden, Vibrant, Cordis, European Union & NERC. 2019
111.Secretaria de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales. NOM-059-SEMARNAT-2010. Diario Oficial de la Federación 2010
112.Cicuzza D, Newton A, Oldfield S. The Red List of Magnoliaceae. Cambridge, UK: Fauna & Flora International; 2007
113.Vázquez García JA, Vargas Rodríguez YL, Aragon Cruz F. Descubrimiento de un bosque deAcer-Podocarpus-Abiesen el municipio de Talpa de Allende, Jalisco, México. Bol del Inst Bot IBUG. 2000;7:159–83
114.Vargas-Rodriguez YL, Platt WJ, Vázquez-García JA, Boquin G. Selecting relict montane cloud forests for conservation priorities: The case of Western Mexico. Natural Areas J. 2010; 30(2):156–73. doi: 10.3375/043.030.0204
115.Fenner M, Thompson K. The ecology of seeds. Cambridge University Press. 2005. 260 p
116.Venable DL, Brown JS. The selective interactions of dispersal, dormancy, and seed size as adaptations for reducing risk in variable environments. Am Nat. 1988;131(3):360–384
117.Calderón Sáenz E. Horticultura deMagnoliaspara la Conservación. In: BGCI, editor. Tepatitlán, México: Neotropical Magnolia Conservation Consortium; 2019. p. 32
118.Gardiner JM. Magnolias. Chester, Connecticut: Globe Pequot Press. 1989. 144 p
119.Figlar RB. GraftingMagnoliaonLiriodendron. J Am Magnolia Soc. 1984; 20(2):21–4
120.Biedermann IEG. Factors affecting establishment and development ofMagnoliahybrids in vitro. Acta Hortic.1987;212:625–30. doi: 10.17660/ActaHortic.1987.212.104
121.Tobe JD. In vitro growth ofMagnolia grandifloraL. cv. Bracken’s Brown Beauty. J Magnolia Soc. 1990;26:4–8
122.IUCN. Guidelines for Re-introductions. Gland, Switzerland: UICN/SSC; 1998. 10 p
123.IUCN/SSC. Guidelines for Reintroductions and Other Conservation Translocations. Ver 1.0. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN Species Survival Commission; 2013. viiii+ 57 pp
124.Sánchez-Velásquez LR, Pineda-López M del R, Vásquez-Morales SG, Avendaño-Yáñez M de la L. Ecology and conservation of endangered species: The case of magnolias. In: Quinn M, editor. Endangered Species: Threats, Conservation and Future Research. Nova Sciences Publisher. 2016. p. 64–84
125.Vázquez-García JA, Muñiz-Castro MÁ, Padilla-Lepe J, Ávila MGP, Hernández GN, González REM.Populus luzae(salicaceae), a new species of white poplar endemic to the western transmexican volcanic belt, in Zapopan, Jalisco, Mexico. Phytotaxa. 2017;328(3):243–56. doi: 10.11646/phytotaxa.328.3.3
126.Pérez De La Rosa JA, Gernandt DS.Pinus vallartensis(Pinaceae), a new species fromWestern Jalisco, Mexico. Phytotaxa. 2017;331(2):233–42. doi: 10.11646/phytotaxa.331.2.7
127.Zabalgoitia A, Figueroa DS, Muñiz-Castro M. A new species ofMiconia(Melastomataceae) endemic to western Jalisco, Mexico. Phytotaxa. 2020;432:01–10. doi: 10.11646/phytotaxa.432.1.1
128.SEMARNAT. Documentos relacionados al Programa para otorgar subsidios de conservación y aprovechamiento sustentable de la vida silvestre nativa. 2020
129.CONANP. Pago por Servicios Ambientales en Áreas Naturales Protegidas. 2010
130.Lascuráin M, List R, Barraza L, Díaz Pardo E, Gual Sill F, Maunder M, et al. Conservación de especies ex situ. In: CONABIO, editor. Capital natural de México. México: CONABIO; 2009. p. 517–44
131.Botanic Gardens Conservation International. Global Survey of Ex-situ Magnoliaceae Collections. Richmond, UK: BGCI; 2008
132.Candolle AP. Regni vegetabilis Systema naturale vol 1. Paris: Treuttel et Würtz; 1817.745 p
133.Vázquez-García JA, Domínguez-Yescas R, Pedraza-Ruiz R, Sánchez-González A, Muñiz-Castro MÁ.Magnolia rzedowskiana(Magnoliaceae), a new species from the sectionMacrophyllain the central part of the Sierra Madre Oriental, Mexico. Acta Bot Mex. 2015;112:19–36
Written By
José Antonio Vázquez-García, Miguel Angel Muñiz-Castro, Alex Dahua-Machoa, Edison Antonio Osorio-Muñoz, Gerardo Hernández-Vera, Alondra Salomé Ortega-Peña, Rosa de Lourdes Romo-Campos, César Jacobo-Pereira, Noelia Álvarez de Román and Viacheslav Shalisko
Submitted: July 29th, 2020Reviewed: October 6th, 2020Published: February 15th, 2021
Open access peer-reviewed chapter
