Analysis

Phylogenetic Tree

Looking at our pollen morphology, the Rhododendron and and Kangaroo Paw shared more similarities leading us to believe that they were closer in relation. However, when looking at the protein sequences we found that the Kangaroo Paw was actually closer in relation to the Kris Kringle cactus. This makes sense because the Kangaroo Paw and Kris Kringle cactus are both plants that live in warm climates while the Rhododendron lives in temperate climates.

Original Scientific Question

"If our hypothesis is supported, we expect to find pollen which live in wet climates to have more protrusions or "spikes"while ones in dry climates have a smooth outside.
If our hypothesis is rejected, we will not see these physical features on the pollen grain which help it maneuver it's environment."

Upon beginning this experiment we believed that wet climate plants would have "clingy" pollen while dry climates had "airborne" pollen. Our hypothesis was semi correct. Kangaroo Paw which comes from a hot climate, while shriveled up appeared to be round/ airborne without any spikes. This matched our hypothesis for pollen and dry climates.The Kris Kringle cactus which resides naturally in a warm but humid climate displayed protrusions in the pollen grain. At first we did not understand why the Kris Kringle would have spikes, however after learning that they are from humid climates, their pollen morphology made sense.
The morphology of the rhododendron however did not show anything that looked "clingy" which is why we decided to group it with Kangaroo Paw in our initial tree. We thought that it would have spikes considering that it came from a wet climate. The rhododendron did not match our initial hypothesis.    

Pollen trees

Here is a link to our morphology pollen tree

Graph credit: Morgan

Above is our phylogenetic tree. Kalmiopsis_leachiana is the Rhododendron (We chose this genus out of the selection on uniprot due to it's nativity in Oregon) and the Anigozanthos_flavidus is the Kangaroo paw (We chose this genus due to the fact that it was yellow, like our sample).

What Our Pollen Morphology Shows

We have observed that the Schlumbergera has Echinate and Foveolate pollen texture, while The Rhododendron and Kangaroo Paw have different surface textures than the Schlumbergera, so we gave  Schlumbergera it’s own branch on the tree. Rhododendron and Kangaroo Paw both have a similar surface texture, therefore we have them branching off together. The Kangaroo Paw branches from the Rhododendron due to the fact that it has a Verrucate texture rather than the Scabrate texture found on the Rhododendron. The reasoning for their connection is the fact that they both have a Psilate surface texture.

What our data shows so far:
For the "Kris Kringle" schlumbergera truncata, we observe that the pollen is characterized as echinate and foveate, because of its spike and hole features. From that we can possibly conclude that the pollen has adapted to its environment to stick to animals in the desert. It could also be airborne, because its shape is   symmetrical in the way that it looks aerodynamic.
The kangaroo paw is more angular and multidimensional. It does not have the disk-like shape of the schlumbergera. Its surface appears smooth. From that we may be able to conclude that is is easier picked up by a pollinator, though it does not appear to be sticky.
Lastly, the rhododendron, is circular from the top view but we cannot conclude whether it is spherical, or more disk like. The resolution on the pictures of the resolution is low and the inconclusive.
Both the rhododendron and the kangaroo paw seem to share a psilate surface. They are neither flat nor disk-like and neither have apertures, like the schlumbergera truncata does.

These observations support our conclusion that the kangaroo paw and rhododendron are more closely related.