DOCSLIB.ORG

From Turkey for Biological Control of Yellow Starthistle (Centaurea Solstitialis) in the United States

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
From Turkey for Biological Control of Yellow Starthistle (Centaurea Solstitialis) in the United States Petition date: Jan. 25, 2006 Mailed on: Jan. 26, 2006 Petitioner: Lincoln Smith U. S. Department of Agriculture – Agricultural Research Service Exotic Invasive Weeds Research Unit Western Regional Research Center 800 Buchanan Street, Albany, CA 94710 tel. (510) 559-6185 fax (510) 559-5737 [email protected] Nature of Petition: Proposed Field Release of the Weevil, Ceratapion basicorne (Coleoptera: Apionidae), from Turkey for Biological Control of Yellow Starthistle (Centaurea solstitialis) in the United States. Evaluation studies were conducted at the USDA-ARS-WRRC quarantine laboratory in Albany, CA and in the field in eastern Turkey. Insects for release will be processed through the WRRC quarantine laboratory. Initial releases and monitoring will be made in California by Lincoln Smith in collaboration with California Department of Food and Agriculture scientists. 2 Table of Contents 1. Introduction: ..........................................................................................................................4 1.1 Nature of the Problem ......................................................................................................4 1.2 Proposed Action...............................................................................................................4 2. Target Weed Information .......................................................................................................5 2.1 Taxonomy........................................................................................................................5 2.1 Description.......................................................................................................................6 2.3 Distribution of Target Weed.............................................................................................6 2.4 Taxonomically Related Plants ..........................................................................................8 2.5 Distribution of Taxonomically Related Plants in North America ......................................9 2.6 Life History....................................................................................................................10 2.7 Impacts ..........................................................................................................................11 2.8 Alternative Management Options ...................................................................................14 3. Biological Control Agent Information..................................................................................18 3.1 Taxonomy......................................................................................................................18 3.2 Geographical Range .......................................................................................................19 3.3 Known Host Range (Specificity) ....................................................................................19 3.4 Life History....................................................................................................................20 3.5 Population of the Agent Studied.....................................................................................20 4. Experimental Methodology and Analysis .............................................................................20 4.1 Test Plant List ................................................................................................................20 4.2 Design of Host Specificity Experiment...........................................................................25 4.3 Positive Controls............................................................................................................27 4.4 Reason for Decisions......................................................................................................28 4.5 Design of Impact Experiment.........................................................................................28 5. Results and Discussion.........................................................................................................29 5.1 Host specificity ..............................................................................................................29 5.2 Impact on target plant.....................................................................................................31 5.3 Summary of Results .......................................................................................................32 5.4 Protocol for Releasing the Agent....................................................................................33 5.5 Post-Release Monitoring ................................................................................................34 5.6 Benefit/Risk ...................................................................................................................34 3 6. Potential Environmental Impacts..........................................................................................35 6.1 Human Impacts ..............................................................................................................35 6.2 Potential Economic Impacts ...........................................................................................35 6.3 Plant Impacts..................................................................................................................35 6.4 Nonplant Impacts ...........................................................................................................36 6.5 Proposed Methods for Mitigation ...................................................................................37 6.6 Abiotic and Edaphic Effects ...........................................................................................37 6.7 Outcome of No Action ...................................................................................................37 7. Petitioner’s Conclusion ........................................................................................................38 Acknowledgements...................................................................................................................39 Literature Cited.........................................................................................................................40 Tables .......................................................................................................................................51 Figures......................................................................................................................................63 Appendices Appendix 1. Genera and Higher Taxa in the Family Asteraceae occuring in North America.........................................................................................................................87 Appendix 2. Host Plant Test List (all in family Asteraceae)..................................................99 Appendix 3. Federally listed Threatened and Endangered species in the family Asteraceae that occur in the continental United States .................................................101 Appendix 4. Key to species of Ceratapion associated with Centaurea solstitialis and some allies (Boris Korotyaev unpubl.). .................................................................107 Appendix 5. Fecundity, development and behavior of Ceratapion basicorne (Coleoptera: Apionidae), a prospective biological control agent of yellow starthistle (Smith and Drew in press). Environmental Entomology..............................................113 Appendix 6. Assessment of risk of attack to safflower by Ceratapion basicorne (Coleoptera: Apionidae), a prospective biological control agent of Centaurea solstitialis (Asteraceae) (Smith et al. 2006). Biological Control..................................131 4 1. Introduction: 1.1 Nature of the Problem Yellow starthistle (YST), Centaurea solstitialis L., was accidentally introduced into California over 130 years ago, primarily through importation of contaminated alfalfa seed (Maddox et al. 1985). The weed infests about 8 million hectares (16-20 million acres) in the western U.S. and Canada (Duncan 2001, Pitcairn et al. in press). Infestations have been reported in 23 of the contiguous 48 states, with the heaviest infestations in the states of California, Idaho, Oregon, and Washington (Maddox, et al., 1985). It is the most common weed in California, and it is continuing to spread (Pitcairn et al. in press) and threaten states to the east. The weed is designated as noxious in 11 western states and two Canadian provinces (Skinner et al. 2000). Yellow starthistle is highly invasive in grassland habitats and displaces desirable plants in both natural and grazing areas. Its flowers have inch-long spines that deter feeding by grazing animals and lower the utility of recreational lands. Consumption of YST by horses causes a fatal syndrome known as "chewing disease" or nigropallidal encephalomalacia (Cordy 1978). Conventional control strategies have been inadequate because of the size of the infestation, economic and environmental costs of herbicides, and the relatively low monetary return from grazing and recreational land use. Yellow starthistle originates from the Mediterranean region, where it generally occurs in low densities and appears to be under natural control (Uygur et al. 2004). Research to discover, evaluate and introduce classical biological control agents began in the 1960s (Maddox 1981; Rosenthal et al. 1992; Turner et al. 1995; Sheley et al. 1999). Some biological control agents
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Outline of Angiosperm Phylogeny
    Outline of angiosperm phylogeny: orders, families, and representative genera with emphasis on Oregon native plants Priscilla Spears December 2013 The following listing gives an introduction to the phylogenetic classification of the flowering plants that has emerged in recent decades, and which is based on nucleic acid sequences as well as morphological and developmental data. This listing emphasizes temperate families of the Northern Hemisphere and is meant as an overview with examples of Oregon native plants. It includes many exotic genera that are grown in Oregon as ornamentals plus other plants of interest worldwide. The genera that are Oregon natives are printed in a blue font. Genera that are exotics are shown in black, however genera in blue may also contain non-native species. Names separated by a slash are alternatives or else the nomenclature is in flux. When several genera have the same common name, the names are separated by commas. The order of the family names is from the linear listing of families in the APG III report. For further information, see the references on the last page. Basal Angiosperms (ANITA grade) Amborellales Amborellaceae, sole family, the earliest branch of flowering plants, a shrub native to New Caledonia – Amborella Nymphaeales Hydatellaceae – aquatics from Australasia, previously classified as a grass Cabombaceae (water shield – Brasenia, fanwort – Cabomba) Nymphaeaceae (water lilies – Nymphaea; pond lilies – Nuphar) Austrobaileyales Schisandraceae (wild sarsaparilla, star vine – Schisandra; Japanese
    [Show full text]
  • ASTERACEAE José Ángel Villarreal-Quintanilla* José Luis Villaseñor-Ríos** Rosalinda Medina-Lemos**
    FLORA DEL VALLE DE TEHUACÁN-CUICATLÁN Fascículo 62. ASTERACEAE José Ángel Villarreal-Quintanilla* José Luis Villaseñor-Ríos** Rosalinda Medina-Lemos** *Departamento de Botánica Universidad Autónoma Agraria Antonio Narro **Departamento de Botánica Instituto de Biología, UNAM INSTITUTO DE BIOLOGÍA UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL AUTÓNOMA DE MÉXICO 2008 Primera edición: octubre de 2008 D.R. © Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México Instituto de Biología. Departamento de Botánica ISBN 968-36-3108-8 Flora del Valle de Tehuacán-Cuicatlán ISBN 970-32-5084-4 Fascículo 62 Dirección de los autores: Departamento de Botánica Universidad Autónoma Agraria Antonio Narro Buenavista, Saltillo C.P. 25315 Coahuila, México Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México Instituto de Biología. Departamento de Botánica. 3er. Circuito de Ciudad Universitaria Coyoacán, 04510. México, D.F. 1 En la portada: 2 1. Mitrocereus fulviceps (cardón) 2. Beaucarnea purpusii (soyate) 3 4 3. Agave peacockii (maguey fibroso) 4. Agave stricta (gallinita) Dibujo de Elvia Esparza FLORA DEL VALLE DE TEHUACÁN-CUICATLÁN 62: 1-59. 2008 ASTERACEAE1 Bercht. & J.Presl Tribu Tageteae José Ángel Villarreal-Quintanilla José Luis Villaseñor-Ríos Rosalinda Medina-Lemos Bibliografía. Bremer, K. 1994. Asteraceae. Cladistics & Classification. Timber Press. Portland, Oregon. 752 p. McVaugh, R. 1984. Compositae. In: W.R. Anderson (ed.). Flora Novo-Galiciana. Ann Arbor The University of Michi- gan Press 12: 40-42. Panero, J.L. & V.A. Funk. 2002. Toward a phylogene- tic subfamily classification for the Compositae (Asteraceae). Proc. Biol. Soc. Washington 115: 909-922. Villaseñor Ríos, J.L. 1993. La familia Asteraceae en México. Rev. Soc. Mex. Hist. Nat. 44: 117-124. Villaseñor Ríos, J.L. 2003. Diversidad y distribución de las Magnoliophyta de México.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 1 the California Flora
    CHAPTER 1 THE CALIFORNIA FLORA The Californian Floristic Province California is a large state with a complex topography and a great diversity of climates and habitats,resulting in a very large assemblage of plant species that vary in size and include both the world’s largest trees and some of the smallest and most unique plant species. In order to create manageable units for plant investigations, botanists have divided the continental landform into geographic units called floristic provinces. These units reflect the wide variations in natural landscapes and assist botanists in predicting where a given plant might be found. Within the borders of California, there are three floristic provinces, each extending beyond the state’s political boundaries. The California Floristic Province includes the geographi- cal area that contains assemblages of plant species that are more or less characteristic of California and that are best de- veloped in the state.This province includes southwestern Ore- gon and northern Baja California but excludes certain areas of the southeastern California desert regions, as well as the area of the state that is east of the Sierra Nevada–Cascade Range axis (map 1).The flora of the desert areas and those east of the Sierra Nevada crest are best developed outside the state, and therefore, parts of the state of California are not in the Cali- fornia Floristic Province. The Great Basin Floristic Province includes some of the area east of the Sierra Nevada and some regions in the northeastern part of the state, although some botanists consider the latter area to belong to another distinct floristic province, the Columbia Plateau Floristic Province.
    [Show full text]
  • Status and Protection of Globally Threatened Species in the Caucasus
    STATUS AND PROTECTION OF GLOBALLY THREATENED SPECIES IN THE CAUCASUS CEPF Biodiversity Investments in the Caucasus Hotspot 2004-2009 Edited by Nugzar Zazanashvili and David Mallon Tbilisi 2009 The contents of this book do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of CEPF, WWF, or their sponsoring organizations. Neither the CEPF, WWF nor any other entities thereof, assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, product or process disclosed in this book. Citation: Zazanashvili, N. and Mallon, D. (Editors) 2009. Status and Protection of Globally Threatened Species in the Caucasus. Tbilisi: CEPF, WWF. Contour Ltd., 232 pp. ISBN 978-9941-0-2203-6 Design and printing Contour Ltd. 8, Kargareteli st., 0164 Tbilisi, Georgia December 2009 The Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund (CEPF) is a joint initiative of l’Agence Française de Développement, Conservation International, the Global Environment Facility, the Government of Japan, the MacArthur Foundation and the World Bank. This book shows the effort of the Caucasus NGOs, experts, scientific institutions and governmental agencies for conserving globally threatened species in the Caucasus: CEPF investments in the region made it possible for the first time to carry out simultaneous assessments of species’ populations at national and regional scales, setting up strategies and developing action plans for their survival, as well as implementation of some urgent conservation measures. Contents Foreword 7 Acknowledgments 8 Introduction CEPF Investment in the Caucasus Hotspot A. W. Tordoff, N. Zazanashvili, M. Bitsadze, K. Manvelyan, E. Askerov, V. Krever, S. Kalem, B. Avcioglu, S. Galstyan and R. Mnatsekanov 9 The Caucasus Hotspot N.
    [Show full text]
  • Diversidad Y Distribución De La Familia Asteraceae En México
    Taxonomía y florística Diversidad y distribución de la familia Asteraceae en México JOSÉ LUIS VILLASEÑOR Botanical Sciences 96 (2): 332-358, 2018 Resumen Antecedentes: La familia Asteraceae (o Compositae) en México ha llamado la atención de prominentes DOI: 10.17129/botsci.1872 botánicos en las últimas décadas, por lo que cuenta con una larga tradición de investigación de su riqueza Received: florística. Se cuenta, por lo tanto, con un gran acervo bibliográfico que permite hacer una síntesis y actua- October 2nd, 2017 lización de su conocimiento florístico a nivel nacional. Accepted: Pregunta: ¿Cuál es la riqueza actualmente conocida de Asteraceae en México? ¿Cómo se distribuye a lo February 18th, 2018 largo del territorio nacional? ¿Qué géneros o regiones requieren de estudios más detallados para mejorar Associated Editor: el conocimiento de la familia en el país? Guillermo Ibarra-Manríquez Área de estudio: México. Métodos: Se llevó a cabo una exhaustiva revisión de literatura florística y taxonómica, así como la revi- sión de unos 200,000 ejemplares de herbario, depositados en más de 20 herbarios, tanto nacionales como del extranjero. Resultados: México registra 26 tribus, 417 géneros y 3,113 especies de Asteraceae, de las cuales 3,050 son especies nativas y 1,988 (63.9 %) son endémicas del territorio nacional. Los géneros más relevantes, tanto por el número de especies como por su componente endémico, son Ageratina (164 y 135, respecti- vamente), Verbesina (164, 138) y Stevia (116, 95). Los estados con mayor número de especies son Oaxa- ca (1,040), Jalisco (956), Durango (909), Guerrero (855) y Michoacán (837). Los biomas con la mayor riqueza de géneros y especies son el bosque templado (1,906) y el matorral xerófilo (1,254).
    [Show full text]
  • 2007 Annual Report Summary
    BIOLOGICAL CONTROL PROGRAM 2008 SUMMARY Developed by: Jim Brown Kris Godfrey Syed Khasimuddin Charles Pickett Mike Pitcairn William Roltsch Baldo Villegas Dale Woods Lue Yang CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE PLANT HEALTH AND PEST PREVENTION SERVICES INTEGRATED PEST CONTROL BRANCH Cite as: Dale M. Woods, Editor, 2009, Biological Control Program 2008 Annual Summary, California Department of Food and Agriculture, Plant Health and Pest Prevention Services, Sacramento, California. 69pp. CDFA CONTRIBUTING PERSONNEL Mr. Jim Brown Dr. Kris Godfrey Dr. Syed Khasimuddin Dr. Charles Pickett Dr. Mike Pitcairn Dr. William Roltsch Mr. Baldo Villegas Dr. Dale Woods Mr. Lue Yang CDFA Technical Assistants Ms. Penny Baxley Ms. Kathleen Cassanave Ms. Lia Chase Ms. Leann Horning Ms. Chia Moua Ms. Viola Popescu Ms. Nancy Saechao Mr. Ciprian Simon County Co-operator Acknowledgement The CDFA Biological Control Program greatly appreciates the many biologists and agriculture commissioners throughout the state whose co-operation and collaboration made this work possible. FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY This report contains unpublished information concerning work in progress. The contents of this report may not be published or reproduced in any form without the prior consent of the research workers involved. Cover developed by Baldo Villegas, Dale Woods, and John P. Mattia (Orange, CT). Infestation of perennial pepperweed east of Susanville, California. (Photo courtesy of Lassen County Weed Management Area). Inset photo shows severe infection of perennial pepperweed by the plant pathogen, Albugo candida. (Photo by Villegas and Woods) COOPERATING SCIENTISTS Ms. Jodi Aceves, Siskiyou County Department of Agriculture, Yreka, California Dr. Pat Akers, CDFA, Integrated Pest Control Branch, Sacramento, California Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Chromosome Numbers in Compositae, XII: Heliantheae
    SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO BOTANY 0 NCTMBER 52 Chromosome Numbers in Compositae, XII: Heliantheae Harold Robinson, A. Michael Powell, Robert M. King, andJames F. Weedin SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION PRESS City of Washington 1981 ABSTRACT Robinson, Harold, A. Michael Powell, Robert M. King, and James F. Weedin. Chromosome Numbers in Compositae, XII: Heliantheae. Smithsonian Contri- butions to Botany, number 52, 28 pages, 3 tables, 1981.-Chromosome reports are provided for 145 populations, including first reports for 33 species and three genera, Garcilassa, Riencourtia, and Helianthopsis. Chromosome numbers are arranged according to Robinson’s recently broadened concept of the Heliantheae, with citations for 212 of the ca. 265 genera and 32 of the 35 subtribes. Diverse elements, including the Ambrosieae, typical Heliantheae, most Helenieae, the Tegeteae, and genera such as Arnica from the Senecioneae, are seen to share a specialized cytological history involving polyploid ancestry. The authors disagree with one another regarding the point at which such polyploidy occurred and on whether subtribes lacking higher numbers, such as the Galinsoginae, share the polyploid ancestry. Numerous examples of aneuploid decrease, secondary polyploidy, and some secondary aneuploid decreases are cited. The Marshalliinae are considered remote from other subtribes and close to the Inuleae. Evidence from related tribes favors an ultimate base of X = 10 for the Heliantheae and at least the subfamily As teroideae. OFFICIALPUBLICATION DATE is handstamped in a limited number of initial copies and is recorded in the Institution’s annual report, Smithsonian Year. SERIESCOVER DESIGN: Leaf clearing from the katsura tree Cercidiphyllumjaponicum Siebold and Zuccarini. Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Main entry under title: Chromosome numbers in Compositae, XII.
    [Show full text]
  • Literature Cited
    Literature Cited Robert W. Kiger, Editor This is a consolidated list of all works cited in volumes 19, 20, and 21, whether as selected references, in text, or in nomenclatural contexts. In citations of articles, both here and in the taxonomic treatments, and also in nomenclatural citations, the titles of serials are rendered in the forms recommended in G. D. R. Bridson and E. R. Smith (1991). When those forms are abbre- viated, as most are, cross references to the corresponding full serial titles are interpolated here alphabetically by abbreviated form. In nomenclatural citations (only), book titles are rendered in the abbreviated forms recommended in F. A. Stafleu and R. S. Cowan (1976–1988) and F. A. Stafleu and E. A. Mennega (1992+). Here, those abbreviated forms are indicated parenthetically following the full citations of the corresponding works, and cross references to the full citations are interpolated in the list alphabetically by abbreviated form. Two or more works published in the same year by the same author or group of coauthors will be distinguished uniquely and consistently throughout all volumes of Flora of North America by lower-case letters (b, c, d, ...) suffixed to the date for the second and subsequent works in the set. The suffixes are assigned in order of editorial encounter and do not reflect chronological sequence of publication. The first work by any particular author or group from any given year carries the implicit date suffix “a”; thus, the sequence of explicit suffixes begins with “b”. Works missing from any suffixed sequence here are ones cited elsewhere in the Flora that are not pertinent in these volumes.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 4 Phytogeography of Northeast Asia
    Chapter 4 Phytogeography of Northeast Asia Hong QIAN 1, Pavel KRESTOV 2, Pei-Yun FU 3, Qing-Li WANG 3, Jong-Suk SONG 4 and Christine CHOURMOUZIS 5 1 Research and Collections Center, Illinois State Museum, 1011 East Ash Street, Springfield, IL 62703, USA, e-mail: [email protected]; 2 Institute of Biology and Soil Science, Russian Academy of Sciences, Vladivostok, 690022, Russia, e-mail: [email protected]; 3 Institute of Applied Ecology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, P.O. Box 417, Shenyang 110015, China; 4 Department of Biological Science, College of Natural Sciences, Andong National University, Andong 760-749, Korea, e-mail: [email protected]; 5 Department of Forest Sciences, University of British Columbia, 3041-2424 mail Mall, Vancouver, B.C., V6T 1Z4, Canada, e-mail: [email protected] Abstract: Northeast Asia as defined in this study includes the Russian Far East, Northeast China, the northern part of the Korean Peninsula, and Hokkaido Island (Japan). We determined the species richness of Northeast Asia at various spatial scales, analyzed the floristic relationships among geographic regions within Northeast Asia, and compared the flora of Northeast Asia with surrounding floras. The flora of Northeast Asia consists of 971 genera and 4953 species of native vascular plants. Based on their worldwide distributions, the 971 gen- era were grouped into fourteen phytogeographic elements. Over 900 species of vascular plants are endemic to Northeast Asia. Northeast Asia shares 39% of its species with eastern Siberia-Mongolia, 24% with Europe, 16.2% with western North America, and 12.4% with eastern North America.
    [Show full text]
  • Molecular Phylogeny of Subtribe Artemisiinae (Asteraceae), Including Artemisia and Its Allied and Segregate Genera Linda E
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Faculty Publications in the Biological Sciences Papers in the Biological Sciences 9-26-2002 Molecular phylogeny of Subtribe Artemisiinae (Asteraceae), including Artemisia and its allied and segregate genera Linda E. Watson Miami University, [email protected] Paul E. Bates University of Nebraska-Lincoln, [email protected] Timonthy M. Evans Hope College, [email protected] Matthew M. Unwin Miami University, [email protected] James R. Estes University of Nebraska State Museum, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/bioscifacpub Watson, Linda E.; Bates, Paul E.; Evans, Timonthy M.; Unwin, Matthew M.; and Estes, James R., "Molecular phylogeny of Subtribe Artemisiinae (Asteraceae), including Artemisia and its allied and segregate genera" (2002). Faculty Publications in the Biological Sciences. 378. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/bioscifacpub/378 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Papers in the Biological Sciences at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Publications in the Biological Sciences by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. BMC Evolutionary Biology BioMed Central Research2 BMC2002, Evolutionary article Biology x Open Access Molecular phylogeny of Subtribe Artemisiinae (Asteraceae), including Artemisia and its allied and segregate genera Linda E Watson*1, Paul L Bates2, Timothy M Evans3,
    [Show full text]
  • Phylogeny and Evolution of Achenial Trichomes In
    Luebert & al. • Achenial trichomes in the Lucilia-group (Asteraceae) TAXON 66 (5) • October 2017: 1184–1199 Phylogeny and evolution of achenial trichomes in the Lucilia-group (Asteraceae: Gnaphalieae) and their systematic significance Federico Luebert,1,2,3 Andrés Moreira-Muñoz,4 Katharina Wilke2 & Michael O. Dillon5 1 Freie Universität Berlin, Institut für Biologie, Botanik, Altensteinstraße 6, 14195 Berlin, Germany 2 Universität Bonn, Nees-Institut für Biodiversität der Pflanzen, Meckenheimer Allee 170, 53115 Bonn, Germany 3 Universidad de Chile, Departamento de Silvicultura y Conservación de la Naturaleza, Santiago, Chile 4 Pontificia Universidad Católica de Valparaíso, Instituto de Geografía, Avenida Brasil 2241, Valparaíso, Chile 5 The Field Museum, Integrative Research Center, 1400 South Lake Shore Drive, Chicago, Illinois 60605, U.S.A. Author for correspondence: Federico Luebert, [email protected] ORCID FL, http://orcid.org/0000­0003­2251­4056; MOD, http://orcid.org/0000­0002­7512­0766 DOI https://doi.org/10.12705/665.11 Abstract The Gnaphalieae (Asteraceae) are a cosmopolitan tribe with around 185 genera and 2000 species. The New World is one of the centers of diversity of the tribe with 24 genera and over 100 species, most of which form a clade called the Lucilia­group with 21 genera. However, the generic classification of the Lucilia­group has been controversial with no agreement on delimitation or circumscription of genera. Especially controversial has been the taxonomic value of achenial trichomes and molecular studies have shown equivocal results so far. The major aims of this paper are to provide a nearly complete phylogeny of the Lucilia­ group at generic level and to discuss the evolutionary trends and taxonomic significance of achenial trichome morphology.
    [Show full text]
  • Nuclear and Plastid DNA Phylogeny of the Tribe Cardueae (Compositae
    1 Nuclear and plastid DNA phylogeny of the tribe Cardueae 2 (Compositae) with Hyb-Seq data: A new subtribal classification and a 3 temporal framework for the origin of the tribe and the subtribes 4 5 Sonia Herrando-Morairaa,*, Juan Antonio Callejab, Mercè Galbany-Casalsb, Núria Garcia-Jacasa, Jian- 6 Quan Liuc, Javier López-Alvaradob, Jordi López-Pujola, Jennifer R. Mandeld, Noemí Montes-Morenoa, 7 Cristina Roquetb,e, Llorenç Sáezb, Alexander Sennikovf, Alfonso Susannaa, Roser Vilatersanaa 8 9 a Botanic Institute of Barcelona (IBB, CSIC-ICUB), Pg. del Migdia, s.n., 08038 Barcelona, Spain 10 b Systematics and Evolution of Vascular Plants (UAB) – Associated Unit to CSIC, Departament de 11 Biologia Animal, Biologia Vegetal i Ecologia, Facultat de Biociències, Universitat Autònoma de 12 Barcelona, ES-08193 Bellaterra, Spain 13 c Key Laboratory for Bio-Resources and Eco-Environment, College of Life Sciences, Sichuan University, 14 Chengdu, China 15 d Department of Biological Sciences, University of Memphis, Memphis, TN 38152, USA 16 e Univ. Grenoble Alpes, Univ. Savoie Mont Blanc, CNRS, LECA (Laboratoire d’Ecologie Alpine), FR- 17 38000 Grenoble, France 18 f Botanical Museum, Finnish Museum of Natural History, PO Box 7, FI-00014 University of Helsinki, 19 Finland; and Herbarium, Komarov Botanical Institute of Russian Academy of Sciences, Prof. Popov str. 20 2, 197376 St. Petersburg, Russia 21 22 *Corresponding author at: Botanic Institute of Barcelona (IBB, CSIC-ICUB), Pg. del Migdia, s. n., ES- 23 08038 Barcelona, Spain. E-mail address: [email protected] (S. Herrando-Moraira). 24 25 Abstract 26 Classification of the tribe Cardueae in natural subtribes has always been a challenge due to the lack of 27 support of some critical branches in previous phylogenies based on traditional Sanger markers.
    [Show full text]