Crocus Biflorus MILLER
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
© Biologiezentrum Linz/Austria; download unter www.biologiezentrum.a KERNDORFF DO &URFXVELÀRUXV²Part IV STAPFIA 99 (2013): 159–186 &URFXVELÀRUXV MILLER /LOLLÀRUDH,ULGDFHDH in Anatolia — Part IV H. KERNDORFF*, E.PASCHE, F. R.BLATTNER & D.HARPKE Abstract,QWKHFRXUVHRIRXUUHVHDUFKRQ7XUNLVKFURFXVHVLQDUHDVRIWKH$QDWROLDQ'LDJRQDO FHQWUDOHDVW- ern Turkey) a new understanding of the genus Crocus was obtained. Phenotypic and morphological param- eters were used for comparison purposes, as well as geographical distributions of genetic groupings. Eleven new species were found and are described. Zusammenfassung: Im Zuge der Erforschung türkischer Krokusse im Bereich der Anatolischen Diagonale ]HQWUDOH2VWWUNHL ZXUGHQXPIDQJUHLFKHQHXH(UNHQQWQLVVHEHUGLH*DWWXQJCrocus gewonnen. Phänoty- SLVFKHXQGPRUSKRORJLVFKH3DUDPHWHUZXUGHQIUXPIDQJUHLFKH9HUJOHLFKHKHUDQJH]RJHQJHQDXVRZLHGLH JHRJUD¿VFKH9HUEUHLWXQJJHQHWLVFKHU*UXSSHQ(OIQHXH$UWHQZXUGHQJHIXQGHQXQGZHUGHQEHVFKULHEHQ Key words: New crocus species, Anatolian Diagonal, phenotype, geography, morphology, Turkey, Crocus kartaldagensis, Crocus romuleoides, Crocus marasensis, Crocus pelitensis, Crocus schneideri, Crocus mun- zurense, Crocus malatyensis, Crocus kangalensis, Crocus sivasensis, Crocus ponticus, Crocus berytius. * Correspondence to: [email protected] Introduction 2XULQYHVWLJDWLRQV KERNDORFF & PASCHE 1993, 1994, 1997, DEKERNDORFF et al. 2011, 2012; PAS- ,QWKHPRVWUHFHQWFODVVL¿FDWLRQ MATHEW 1982) Crocus bi- CHE 1993) also resulted in the description of new taxa treated as ÀRUXV MILLERR was described as a variable species concerning subspecies following MATHEW¶V FODVVL¿FDWLRQ+RZHYHU NDU\RORJ\ n = 8, 10, 12, 14, 18, 20, 22; BRIGHTON et al. 1973) doubts arose concerning their taxonomical rank, because 23 sub- and morphology. Therefore, MATHEW GLYLGHGWKLVVSHFLHV species of one species would be unique in the genus and seemed into several subspecies distributed from Italy to the Caucasus to be rather improbable to us. and Iran, with the type species referring to the Italian &ELÀRUXV ,QSDUWWKUHHZHFRPSOHWHGRXU¿HOGVWXGLHVRQ &URFXVELÀR- populations and the highest taxon diversity in Turkey. rus “sensu lato” in south-west Anatolia. We obtained interesting Nearly 20 years ago, we started morphological and geo- new information on the alliance and distribution of the crocuses graphical investigations of C.ELÀRUXV populations in Turkey aff- in this area and continued our research in the mountains of cen- ter seeing many strange crocus populations in Lycia, which were tral-east Anatolia. QRWLGHQWL¿DEOHZLWKWKHNQRZQNH\VDWWKDWWLPH7KHUHIRUHZLWK the aim to clarify the situation and to identify those populations, we measured and analysed 20 morphological parameters of a General aspects of the new situation in the VWDWLVWLFDOO\VXI¿FLHQWQXPEHURIUDQGRPO\VHOHFWHGVSHFLPHQV genus Crocus RIDSRSXODWLRQ ZHDFFXPXODWHGDERXWUDZGDWDRI crocus populations all over Turkey; KERNDORFF & PASCHE 2004b, From our present state of knowledge it seems necessary to recognise and discuss some fundamental principles in plant tax- STAPFIA: reports 159 © Biologiezentrum Linz/Austria; download unter www.biologiezentrum.a KERNDORFF DO&URFXVELÀRUXV²Part IV STAPFIA 99 (2013): 159–186 Fig. 1: The Anatolian Diagonal and its phytogeographic districts (extract of Davis, 1971). onomy and systematic which were followed by us in our recent 6LJQL¿FDQWH[DPSOHVIRUVXFKFRÀRZHULQJSRSXODWLRQVZLWKRXW work to clarify the taxonomical status of the crocuses investi- LQWHUEUHHGLQJ ZHUH IRXQG LQ WKH$QWLWDXUXV DUHD ZLWKWKH gated. First of all, we had the necessity to consider the accepted taxa C. albocoronatus KERND. & PASCHE and C. pelitensis DQHZ GH¿QLWLRQVRIWKHWD[RQRPLFXQLWVRIVXEVSHFLHVDQGVSHFLHV taxon described in this paper), in Pisidia with the taxa aff. C. isauricus (SIEHE EX BOWLES) B. MATHEW and C. crewei (HOOK. L 6XEVSHFLHV LQIUDVSHFL¿FWD[RQ DUHWD[DZKLFKDUHVOLJKW- F.) B. MATHEW, in Caria C. ionopharynx KERND. & PASCHE and C. ly morphologically differentiated as well as geographically caricus KERND. & PASCHE, in the Lycian Taurus with the taxa aff. and/or ecologically isolated but still potentially capable of C. nubigena (HERB.) B. MATHEW and C. babadagensis KERND. LQWHUEUHHGLQJZLWKRXWVXEVWDQWLDOUHGXFWLRQLQIHUWLOLW\ HJ & PASCHE. WETTSTEIN MEIKLE FUCHS 1898; 1957; 1958). Furthermore, phylogenetic investigations clearly support a LL 7KHPDLQGLIIHUHQFHRIDVSHFLHVLQFRPSDULVRQWRDVXEVSH- GLVWLQFWLRQDWVSHFLHVOHYHO PETERSEN et al. 2008; HARPKE et al. FLHVLVLWVUHSURGXFWLYHLVRODWLRQIURPRWKHUWD[D HJ MAYR 2013) as &ELÀRUXV subspecies were found in distinct clusters. 1992). As consequence, different species of the same genus One cluster is very homogenous and occupies the sister group and at the same locality should only occasionally produce position to a large clade comprising series Aleppici, Flavi, Spe- hybrids or only sterile hybrids. ciosi, Reticulati and other former &ELÀRUXVVXEVSHFLHV HARPKE HWDO 6XUSULVLQJO\WD[DRIWKLVYHU\GLVWLQFWFOXVWHUDUHLQ- +RZHYHUWKHGH¿QLWLRQVRID³VSHFLHV´DUHPXFKPRUHFRP- habitants of the Anatolian Diagonal or are occurring north, east, plex and still a matter of controversial discussions and there is DQGVRXWKHDVWRILW7KH\DUHFKDUDFWHUL]HGE\KDYLQJFKURPR- still much space for individual interpretation. Therefore, in case some numbers mainly between 18 and 24 while C. cf. bilforus of systematic uncertainties the term subspecies is often used as a west of the Anatolian Diagonal have chromosome numbers be- dumping ground for similar taxa of varying rank. WZHHQDQG SCHNEIDER et al. 2013). For species of this dis- Nevertheless, if one looks at the known existing hybrids in WLQFWFOXVWHU ³$GDPLFOXVWHU´ ZHZLOOHVWDEOLVKDQHZVHULHVLQ the series %LÀRULLWLVVXUSULVLQJWKDWWKHUHDUHRQO\VRPH QRQH a new systematic treatment of the genus. The crocuses presented fertile?) between C. chrysanthus HERBERT and & ELÀRUXV but LQWKLVDUWLFOHDOOEHORQJWRWKLVFOXVWHU HARPKE et al. 2013, and QRQHEHWZHHQWKHRWKHUWD[DDQGQRQHEHWZHHQWKHGH¿QHGC. own unpublished data). ELÀRUXV VXEVSHFLHVQRWHYHQZKHQWULHGWRFURVVDUWL¿FLDOO\:H )XUWKHUPRUHSK\ORJHQHWLF HARPKE et al. 2013, unpublished) found mixed populations of “allegedly” &ELÀRUXV subspecies DQG PRUSKRORJLFDO KERNDORFF et al. unpublished) investiga- ÀRZHULQJ DW WKH VDPH WLPH EXW ZLWKRXW DQ\ WUDFH RI K\EULGV tions suggest that &ELÀRUXV from the type region in Italy gener- 160 STAPFIA: reports © Biologiezentrum Linz/Austria; download unter www.biologiezentrum.a KERNDORFF DO &URFXVELÀRUXV²Part IV STAPFIA 99 (2013): 159–186 Fig. 2: Localities and HKEP-identity numbers (next or above the points) of investigated crocus populations. Distribution map generated with DIVA-GIS v7.5.0 using the altitude layers provided by at the DIVA-GIS homepage. ally is distinct from all Turkish populations, which means there Characterization of the distribution area is no &ELÀRUXV in Anatolia and no &ELÀRUXV aggregate. 7KHVH ¿QGLQJV DOVR IRUFH XV WR UHWKLQN WKH UHVXOWV DQG LQ- Compared to the area dealt with in part two and three, the terpretations of our multivariate morphological cluster analyses, “Anatolian Diagonal” is much larger with an extension of ap- which we used for taxonomical differentiation in part two and proximately 800 km, from the Anti-Taurus to the eastern end of WKH3RQWLFUDQJHZLWKDELIXUFDWLRQLQWKHVRXWK )LJ ,WFRQ- three. As those included solely morphological and phenotypic sists of many often clearly separated mountain stocks or ranges, parameters they were only useful for morphological separations DOO PRUH RU OHVV RULHQWDWHG IURP VRXWKZHVW WR QRUWKHDVW *HR- RISRSXODWLRQV WD[D 1HYHUWKHOHVVLWZDVDKHOSIXOWRROWRXQ- graphical isolation inside this area may be responsible for the derstand and handle the recognised complex situation of cro- high number of endemics in many genera, which are restricted to FXVHVLQ6RXWKZHVW7XUNH\DQGWRJHWDQLGHDKRZFRPSOLFDWHG parts of this diagonal mountain-belt or can be found right along the situation in the genus really is. The situation improved dra- LW DAVIS )XUWKHUPRUHFRQQHFWHGWRWKH$QDWROLDQ'LDJR- matically when genetic analyses were included in our work. We nal CULLEN XQSXEOLVKHG GLVFRYHUHGDUHPDUNDEOHÀRUDOEUHDN are now able to infer relationships within the genus, which is the when he analysed the distribution of plant species for volume PRVWLPSRUWDQWSUHUHTXLVLWHIRUWD[RQRPLFDOGH¿QLWLRQVDQGV\V- one of the Flora of Turkey. Our phylogenetic results concerning tematic groupings. In our case analytical results of two nuclear the genus Crocus HARPKE et al. 2013, unpublished) also clearly as well as two chloroplast regions are available for this purpose. VXSSRUWWKLVÀRUDOEUHDNWKURXJKLQQHU$QDWROLDDVQRQHRIWKH Adami-group taxa can be found westwards of the Anatolian Di- One can expect of course correlations between genetic re- agonal. sults, the morphological parameters, and the geographical dis- Phytogeographical differentiations in and adjacent to the tributions of the crocuses. To shed more light on these connec- $QDWROLDQ 'LDJRQDO DAVIS 1971) can be seen on Fig. 1. Ac- - WLRQVDQGWR¿QGRXWWKHPRVWXVHIXOSDUDPHWHUVIRUWD[RQRPL cording to the actual situation, areas belonging to the Irano- cal purpose, all taxa, which genetically group together, will be Turanian region are predominant in central Anatolia, divided compared phenotypically, morphologically, and geographically. E\WKH$QDWROLDQ'LDJRQDOLQWRDZHVWHUQSDUW FHQWUDO$QDWROLD In our opinion, this is the most effective way to establish now a &$ DQGLQWRDQHDVWHUQSDUW HDVW$QDWROLD($ 7KHVRXWKHUQ natural system of Crocus. More results of these investigations DQGVRXWKHDVWHUQSDUWRIHDVW$QDWROLDLV0HVRSRWDPLD