DOCSLIB.ORG

Thorne's System of Classification of Angiospermic Plant

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Thorne's System of Classification of Angiospermic Plant Plant Taxonomy Prof. (Dr.) Punam Jeswal Head M.Sc semester ll Department of Botany Thorne's System of Classification of Angiospermic Plant Robert F. Thorne (1983) published a pure phylogenetic system of classification based on the characters adopted from the comparative morphology, paleontology, ultrastructure, cytology, pollen and seed morphology, phytogeography and host-parasite interactions. Salient Features - The author considered relationships or similarities more important than differences and claimed his taxa to be more inclusive than those with more disintegrative tendencies. According to him the divergence of his system from other systems are startling realignments that are new or at least different from standard treatments. He considered angiosperms as well as two classes, Magnoliopsida and Liliopsida, as monophyletic taxa. The system includes data from all available evidences like other contemporary authors. Thorne divided class Annonopsida (Angiospermae) into 2 subclasses, 28 super- orders, 54 orders, 73 suborders, 350 families, 12,255 genera and 2,25, 490 species. Angiospermae (Annonopsida) 2 subclasses Dicotyledonae Monocotyledonae (Annonidae) (Liliidae) 1. Annoniflorae 22. Rhamnales 1. Liliiflorae 1. Annonoles 23. Euphorbiales 1. Liliales 2. Nelumbonales 10. Rutiflorae 2. Triuridiflorae 3. Paeoniales 24. Rutales 2. Triuridales 4. Berberidales 11. Proteiflorae 3. Alismatiflorae 2. Nymphaeiflorae 25. Proteales 3. Alismatales 5. Nymphaeales 12. Hamamelidiflorae 4. Zosterales 3. Rafflesiflorae 26. Hamamelidales 5. Najadales 6. Rafflesiales 27. Casuarinales 4. Ariflorae 4. Theiflorae 28. Fagales 6. Arales 7. Theales 13. Rosiflorae 5. Cyclanthiflorae 8. Ericales 29. Rosales 7. Cyclanthales 9. Fouquieriales 30. Pittosporales 6. Pandaniflorae 10. Ebenales 14. Loasiflorae 8. Pandanales 11. Primulales 31. Loasales 7. Areciflorae 12. Polygonales 15. Myrtiflorae 9. Arecales 5. Chenopodiiflorae 32. Myrtales 8. Typhiflorae 13. Chenopodiales 16. Gentianiflorae 10. Typhales 14. Geraniales 33. Oleales 9. Commeliniflorae 6. Celastriflorae 34. Gentianales 11. Commelinales 15. Celastrales 35. Bignoniales 12. Zingiberales 7. Santaliflorae 36. Lamiales 16. Santalales 17. Solaniflorae 17. Balanophorales 37. Solanales 8. Violiflorae 38. Companulales 18. Violales 18. Corniflorae 19. Capparales 39. Cornales 9. Malviflorae 40. Araliales 20. Malvales 41. Dipsacales 21. Urticales 19. Asteriflorae 42. Asterales Fig :- Outline of Thorne's System of Classification Critical Comments Merits - 1. Annonales are universally accepted as the most primitive living angiosperms, and they form the starting point of this system. 2. The divisions of dicots into Archichlamydeae and Metachlamydeae are abolished as against the traditional system. 3. Largely the similarities are given greater emphasis than differences and related taxa are placed closer. 4. After abolishing Amentiferae (a group of unrelated families), their families have been distributed in different orders. 5. Inclusion of orders Malvales, Urticales, Rhamnales and Euphorbiales under one superorder Malviflorae is appreciable feature of this system. 6. Classification of the related orders Cornales and Dipsacales under one superorder Corniflorae is also a commendable merit of the system. Demerits - 1. The system has no practical value for identification of plants. 2. The system includes box in box categories, which makes it confusing and complex. 3. Several taxonomists do not accept Pteridospermous origin of angiosperms in early Cretaceous times, as the author advocated. 4. Against the inclusiveness of the taxa over contemporary systems, as claimed by the author himself, the main theme however remained the same as proposed by Takhtajan and Cronquist. 5. Commenting upon the system, Merxmuller (1977) stated, This reminds me a little of the old Englerian times in which so many infra-specific categories like proles, subvariety, subforma and so have been in vogue. We should deliberate whether this superordinal inflation is not another fruitless trial of expressing quite doubtful phylogenetical contexts by box-in-box schemes. He further narrated that At all events this inflated classification is a perfect means for confusing non-taxonomists by a fashionable application of non-existing nomenclatural rules to these higher categories. .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Life History Mediates the Trade-Offs Among Different Components Of
    1 Life history mediates the trade-offs among different components 2 of demographic resilience 3 4 Authors: Pol Capdevila1,2*, Iain Stott3, James Cant4, Maria Beger4,5, Gwilym 5 Rowlands1, Molly Grace1, Roberto Salguero-Gómez1,5,6 6 1Zoology Department, Oxford University, Zoology Research and Administration Building, 11a 7 Mansfield Rd, Oxford OX1 3SZ, UK 8 2School of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol, 24 Tyndall Ave, BS8 1TQ, Bristol, UK 9 3School of Life Sciences, University of Lincoln, Brayford Pool, Lincoln LN6 7TS, UK 10 4School of Biology, Faculty of Biological Sciences, University of Leeds, UK, LS2 9JT 11 5Centre for Biodiversity and Conservation Science, School of Biological Sciences, University of 12 Queensland, Brisbane, 4072, Australia 13 6Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Konrad Zuse Straße 1, Rostock 18057, Germany 14 *Corresponding author: [email protected] 1 15 Table S1. Taxonomic summary of the matrix population models used in our 16 analyses. N sp represents the number of species and N pop the number of 17 populations. Kingdom Class Order N sp N pop Perciformes 3 3 Actinopterygii Siluriformes 1 1 Elasmobranchii Lamniformes 1 2 Accipitriformes 5 9 Anseriformes 1 3 Charadriiformes 3 6 Falconiformes 1 2 Galliformes 1 1 Aves Gruiformes 1 1 Passeriformes 1 1 Pelecaniformes 1 1 Procellariiformes 2 2 Animalia Psittaciformes 2 3 Strigiformes 1 1 Artiodactyla 5 43 Carnivora 12 24 Chiroptera 1 1 Mammalia Diprotodontia 1 1 Primates 9 14 Proboscidea 1 1 Rodentia 4 5 Crocodylia 1 1 Reptilia Squamata 1 3 Testudines 8 19 Alismatales 1 1 Asparagales 5 18 Dioscoreales 1 1 Liliopsida Liliales 14 72 Poales 7 19 Zingiberales 2 6 Apiales 7 20 Plantae Asterales 20 44 Brassicales 10 34 Caryophyllales 33 84 Magnoliopsida Cornales 1 1 Dipsacales 2 6 Ericales 11 60 Fabales 12 70 2 Fagales 4 31 Gentianales 3 4 Geraniales 2 8 Lamiales 11 45 Magnoliales 1 1 Malpighiales 10 23 Malvales 4 8 Myrtales 3 12 Proteales 1 2 Ranunculales 11 31 Rosales 4 7 Sapindales 4 4 Saxifragales 1 1 Solanales 2 2 Pinopsida Pinales 4 6 18 3 19 Table S2.
    [Show full text]
  • Full of Beans: a Study on the Alignment of Two Flowering Plants Classification Systems
    Full of beans: a study on the alignment of two flowering plants classification systems Yi-Yun Cheng and Bertram Ludäscher School of Information Sciences, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, USA {yiyunyc2,ludaesch}@illinois.edu Abstract. Advancements in technologies such as DNA analysis have given rise to new ways in organizing organisms in biodiversity classification systems. In this paper, we examine the feasibility of aligning two classification systems for flowering plants using a logic-based, Region Connection Calculus (RCC-5) ap- proach. The older “Cronquist system” (1981) classifies plants using their mor- phological features, while the more recent Angiosperm Phylogeny Group IV (APG IV) (2016) system classifies based on many new methods including ge- nome-level analysis. In our approach, we align pairwise concepts X and Y from two taxonomies using five basic set relations: congruence (X=Y), inclusion (X>Y), inverse inclusion (X<Y), overlap (X><Y), and disjointness (X!Y). With some of the RCC-5 relationships among the Fabaceae family (beans family) and the Sapindaceae family (maple family) uncertain, we anticipate that the merging of the two classification systems will lead to numerous merged solutions, so- called possible worlds. Our research demonstrates how logic-based alignment with ambiguities can lead to multiple merged solutions, which would not have been feasible when aligning taxonomies, classifications, or other knowledge or- ganization systems (KOS) manually. We believe that this work can introduce a novel approach for aligning KOS, where merged possible worlds can serve as a minimum viable product for engaging domain experts in the loop. Keywords: taxonomy alignment, KOS alignment, interoperability 1 Introduction With the advent of large-scale technologies and datasets, it has become increasingly difficult to organize information using a stable unitary classification scheme over time.
    [Show full text]
  • Generic Classification of Amaryllidaceae Tribe Hippeastreae Nicolás García,1 Alan W
    TAXON 2019 García & al. • Genera of Hippeastreae SYSTEMATICS AND PHYLOGENY Generic classification of Amaryllidaceae tribe Hippeastreae Nicolás García,1 Alan W. Meerow,2 Silvia Arroyo-Leuenberger,3 Renata S. Oliveira,4 Julie H. Dutilh,4 Pamela S. Soltis5 & Walter S. Judd5 1 Herbario EIF & Laboratorio de Sistemática y Evolución de Plantas, Facultad de Ciencias Forestales y de la Conservación de la Naturaleza, Universidad de Chile, Av. Santa Rosa 11315, La Pintana, Santiago, Chile 2 USDA-ARS-SHRS, National Germplasm Repository, 13601 Old Cutler Rd., Miami, Florida 33158, U.S.A. 3 Instituto de Botánica Darwinion, Labardén 200, CC 22, B1642HYD, San Isidro, Buenos Aires, Argentina 4 Departamento de Biologia Vegetal, Instituto de Biologia, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Postal Code 6109, 13083-970 Campinas, SP, Brazil 5 Florida Museum of Natural History, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida 32611, U.S.A. Address for correspondence: Nicolás García, [email protected] DOI https://doi.org/10.1002/tax.12062 Abstract A robust generic classification for Amaryllidaceae has remained elusive mainly due to the lack of unequivocal diagnostic characters, a consequence of highly canalized variation and a deeply reticulated evolutionary history. A consensus classification is pro- posed here, based on recent molecular phylogenetic studies, morphological and cytogenetic variation, and accounting for secondary criteria of classification, such as nomenclatural stability. Using the latest sutribal classification of Hippeastreae (Hippeastrinae and Traubiinae) as a foundation, we propose the recognition of six genera, namely Eremolirion gen. nov., Hippeastrum, Phycella s.l., Rhodolirium s.str., Traubia, and Zephyranthes s.l. A subgeneric classification is suggested for Hippeastrum and Zephyranthes to denote putative subclades.
    [Show full text]
  • (Monocot): the Story of a Gene Family Expansion Alberto Cenci, Nathalie Chantret, Mathieu Rouard
    Glycosyltransferase Family 61 in Liliopsida (Monocot): The Story of a Gene Family Expansion Alberto Cenci, Nathalie Chantret, Mathieu Rouard To cite this version: Alberto Cenci, Nathalie Chantret, Mathieu Rouard. Glycosyltransferase Family 61 in Liliopsida (Monocot): The Story of a Gene Family Expansion. Frontiers in Plant Science, Frontiers, 2018, 9, 10.3389/fpls.2018.01843. hal-02621636 HAL Id: hal-02621636 https://hal.inrae.fr/hal-02621636 Submitted on 26 May 2020 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution| 4.0 International License fpls-09-01843 December 8, 2018 Time: 15:6 # 1 ORIGINAL RESEARCH published: 11 December 2018 doi: 10.3389/fpls.2018.01843 Glycosyltransferase Family 61 in Liliopsida (Monocot): The Story of a Gene Family Expansion Alberto Cenci1*, Nathalie Chantret2 and Mathieu Rouard1 1 Bioversity International, Parc Scientifique Agropolis II, Montpellier, France, 2 AGAP, INRA, CIRAD, Université de Montpellier, Montpellier, France Plant cell walls play a fundamental role in several plant traits and also influence crop use as livestock nutrition or biofuel production. The Glycosyltransferase family 61 (GT61) is involved in the synthesis of cell wall xylans.
    [Show full text]
  • Threatened and Endangered Species List
    Effective April 15, 2009 - List is subject to revision For a complete list of Tennessee's Rare and Endangered Species, visit the Natural Areas website at http://tennessee.gov/environment/na/ Aquatic and Semi-aquatic Plants and Aquatic Animals with Protected Status State Federal Type Class Order Scientific Name Common Name Status Status Habit Amphibian Amphibia Anura Gyrinophilus gulolineatus Berry Cave Salamander T Amphibian Amphibia Anura Gyrinophilus palleucus Tennessee Cave Salamander T Crustacean Malacostraca Decapoda Cambarus bouchardi Big South Fork Crayfish E Crustacean Malacostraca Decapoda Cambarus cymatilis A Crayfish E Crustacean Malacostraca Decapoda Cambarus deweesae Valley Flame Crayfish E Crustacean Malacostraca Decapoda Cambarus extraneus Chickamauga Crayfish T Crustacean Malacostraca Decapoda Cambarus obeyensis Obey Crayfish T Crustacean Malacostraca Decapoda Cambarus pristinus A Crayfish E Crustacean Malacostraca Decapoda Cambarus williami "Brawley's Fork Crayfish" E Crustacean Malacostraca Decapoda Fallicambarus hortoni Hatchie Burrowing Crayfish E Crustacean Malocostraca Decapoda Orconectes incomptus Tennessee Cave Crayfish E Crustacean Malocostraca Decapoda Orconectes shoupi Nashville Crayfish E LE Crustacean Malocostraca Decapoda Orconectes wrighti A Crayfish E Fern and Fern Ally Filicopsida Polypodiales Dryopteris carthusiana Spinulose Shield Fern T Bogs Fern and Fern Ally Filicopsida Polypodiales Dryopteris cristata Crested Shield-Fern T FACW, OBL, Bogs Fern and Fern Ally Filicopsida Polypodiales Trichomanes boschianum
    [Show full text]
  • The Fossil Record of Angiosperm Families in Relation to Baraminology
    The Proceedings of the International Conference on Creationism Volume 7 Article 31 2013 The Fossil Record of Angiosperm Families in Relation to Baraminology Roger W. Sanders Bryan College Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.cedarville.edu/icc_proceedings DigitalCommons@Cedarville provides a publication platform for fully open access journals, which means that all articles are available on the Internet to all users immediately upon publication. However, the opinions and sentiments expressed by the authors of articles published in our journals do not necessarily indicate the endorsement or reflect the views of DigitalCommons@Cedarville, the Centennial Library, or Cedarville University and its employees. The authors are solely responsible for the content of their work. Please address questions to [email protected]. Browse the contents of this volume of The Proceedings of the International Conference on Creationism. Recommended Citation Sanders, Roger W. (2013) "The Fossil Record of Angiosperm Families in Relation to Baraminology," The Proceedings of the International Conference on Creationism: Vol. 7 , Article 31. Available at: https://digitalcommons.cedarville.edu/icc_proceedings/vol7/iss1/31 Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Creationism. Pittsburgh, PA: Creation Science Fellowship THE FOSSIL RECORD OF ANGIOSPERM FAMILIES IN RELATION TO BARAMINOLOGY Roger W. Sanders, Ph.D., Bryan College #7802, 721 Bryan Drive, Dayton, TN 37321 USA KEYWORDS: Angiosperms, flowering plants, fossils, baramins, Flood, post-Flood continuity criterion, continuous fossil record ABSTRACT To help estimate the number and boundaries of created kinds (i.e., baramins) of flowering plants, the fossil record has been analyzed. To designate the status of baramin, a criterion is applied that tests whether some but not all of a group’s hierarchically immediate subgroups have a fossil record back to the Flood (accepted here as near the Cretaceous-Paleogene boundary).
    [Show full text]
  • System Garden Masterplan, Melbourne University 2018
    SYstem GARDEN LANDSCAPE MASTERPLAN STAGE 4 - MASTERPLAN FINAL REPORT 8th MARCH 2018 landscape architecture and GLAS urban design CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 INTRODUCTION 3 HistorY OF THE SYstem GARDEN 4 THE GARDEN TODAY 5 KEY ISSUES FACING THE SYstem GARDEN 6 Masterplan VISION 7 K EY VALUES 8 THE SYstem GARDEN AND OC21 9 VISION: A BOTANIC GARDEN FOR THE CAMPUS 10 MASTERPLAN PRINCIPLES 11 THE SYstem GARDEN MASTERPLAN 13 strategic INITIATIVES 15 BotanicAL DivERSiTy - SuB-cLASS PLANTiNG GuiDELiNES 16 INTERPRETATION StrateGY 17 UNIVERSITY HISTORY 18 INDIGENOUS ConnecTION 19 SUSTAINABILITY 20 MATERIALS PALETTE 21 MATERiALS PALETTE - LiGHTiNG AND PoWER 22 MATERiALS PALETTE - coNSoLiDATiNG SERvicES 23 FURNITURE 24 Access 25 ART AND EVENTS IN THE GARDEN 26 Masterplan ELEMENTS 27 master PLAN ELEMENTS 28 PERIMETER PATH AND EDGE SPACES 29 SYstem GARDEN GATEs 30 ENTRy AvENuES - BiZARRE SENTRiES 31 THE FORMAL GARDEN 32 WETLAND cANAL 37 THE INFORMAL GARDEN 38 COURTYARD GARDENS 43 rainforest GARDEN 44 FERN AND LICHEN COURTYARD 45 APOTHECARY GARDEN 47 RESEARCH GARDENS 48 implementation STAGING 50 APPENDIX 1: costing 55 APPENDIX 2: CONSULTANT REPORTS 57 EXecUTIVE SUMMARY IntroDUction The System Garden is a special space. Originally laid out in 1856 by Professor Frederick McCoy and The Core values, are key to the current and future operation of the Parkville campus, they have a • indigenous connection: the System Garden provides indigenous interpretation through Edward LaTrobe Bateman, it is a botanic garden configured specifically for learning. It provides a direct link to the University’s OC21 strategy (Our Campus in the 21st Century) and will drive the the Billibellary’s walk and stop within the System Garden.
    [Show full text]
  • The Root Systems of Onion and Allium Fistulosum in The
    Flower development of Lilium longiflorum: Characterisation of MADS-box transcription factors VAGNER AUGUSTO BENEDITO Promotor: Prof. dr. S. C. de Vries Hoogleraar in de Biochemie Wageningen Universiteit Co-promotoren: Dr. F. A. Krens Clusterleider, businessunit Biodiversiteit en Veredeling, Plant Research International Prof. dr. Ir. G. C. Angenent Clusterleider, businessunit Bioscience, Plant Research International / Hoogleraar in de Moleculaire Plantontwikkeling, Katholieke Universiteit Nijmegen Promotiecommissie: Dr. L. Colombo Università delgi Studi di Milano, Italië Prof. dr. T. Bisseling Wageningen Universiteit Dr. R. G. H. Immink Plant Research International Prof. dr. L. H. W. van der Plas Wageningen Universiteit Flower development of Lilium longiflorum: Characterisation of MADS-box transcription factors Vagner Augusto Benedito Proefschrift ter verkrijging van de graad van doctor op gezag van de rector magnificus van Wageningen Universiteit Prof. dr. ir. L. Speelman in het openbaar te verdedigen op woensdag 14 januari 2004 des namiddags te vier uur in de Aula Flower development of Lilium longiflorum: Characterisation of MADS-box transcription factors. Ph.D. thesis, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands 2004. With summaries in English, Dutch and Portuguese. ISBN: 90-5808-947-9 "To the people from Brazil, I dedicate this thesis" Por isso na impaciência Desta sede de saber, Como as aves do deserto As almas buscam beber… Oh! Bendito o que semeia Livros… livros à mão cheia… E manda o povo pensar! O livro caindo n'alma É germe
    [Show full text]
  • Phylogeny, Genome Size, and Chromosome Evolution of Asparagales J
    Aliso: A Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Botany Volume 22 | Issue 1 Article 24 2006 Phylogeny, Genome Size, and Chromosome Evolution of Asparagales J. Chris Pires University of Wisconsin-Madison; University of Missouri Ivan J. Maureira University of Wisconsin-Madison Thomas J. Givnish University of Wisconsin-Madison Kenneth J. Systma University of Wisconsin-Madison Ole Seberg University of Copenhagen; Natural History Musem of Denmark See next page for additional authors Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.claremont.edu/aliso Part of the Botany Commons Recommended Citation Pires, J. Chris; Maureira, Ivan J.; Givnish, Thomas J.; Systma, Kenneth J.; Seberg, Ole; Peterson, Gitte; Davis, Jerrold I.; Stevenson, Dennis W.; Rudall, Paula J.; Fay, Michael F.; and Chase, Mark W. (2006) "Phylogeny, Genome Size, and Chromosome Evolution of Asparagales," Aliso: A Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Botany: Vol. 22: Iss. 1, Article 24. Available at: http://scholarship.claremont.edu/aliso/vol22/iss1/24 Phylogeny, Genome Size, and Chromosome Evolution of Asparagales Authors J. Chris Pires, Ivan J. Maureira, Thomas J. Givnish, Kenneth J. Systma, Ole Seberg, Gitte Peterson, Jerrold I. Davis, Dennis W. Stevenson, Paula J. Rudall, Michael F. Fay, and Mark W. Chase This article is available in Aliso: A Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Botany: http://scholarship.claremont.edu/aliso/vol22/iss1/ 24 Asparagales ~£~2COTSgy and Evolution Excluding Poales Aliso 22, pp. 287-304 © 2006, Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden PHYLOGENY, GENOME SIZE, AND CHROMOSOME EVOLUTION OF ASPARAGALES 1 7 8 1 3 9 J. CHRIS PIRES, • • IVAN J. MAUREIRA, THOMAS J. GIVNISH, 2 KENNETH J. SYTSMA, 2 OLE SEBERG, · 9 4 6 GITTE PETERSEN, 3· JERROLD I DAVIS, DENNIS W.
    [Show full text]
  • Modern System of Classification the System of Classification Is Used All
    Modern System of Classification The system of classification is used all types of information i.e. morphology, anatomy, histological, biochemical and DNA analyses. The modern classifications are as follows: Tackhtazan, Cronquist, Angiosperm Phyllogeny Group (APG) etc. According to Arther Cronquist, Angiosperm or Magnoliophyta Division is classified into two Classes: A. Class- Magnoliopsida (Dicotyledon) B. Class-Liliopsida (Monocotyledon) A. Class Magnoliopsida (Dicotyledon) has six subclasses (S), 63 orders, 315 families, and around 165400 species. The class has following subclasses: S1- Magnoliidae This subclass contains 8 orders, 39 families and about 11000 species. They are most primitive angiosperms. The major characteristics of the members of Magnoliidae subclass are: Many parted well-developed perianth of tepals Differentiated into sepals and petals but sometimes apetalous The stamens are numerous and mature in a centripetal manner S2-Hamamelidae This subclass possesses 11 orders, 23 families and about 3400 species, it is the smallest subclass of dicots. The important characteristics of the subclass are: The perienth is absent or poorly developed Many are unisexual flower The mature fruit contains single seed S3-Caryophyllidae The subclass Caryophyllidae contains three orders, 14 families and about 11000 species. The subclass has following characteristics: Mostly herbaceous mostly succulents or halophytes Placentation is mostly free central or basal Pollens are tricoplate S4-Dilleniidae It contains 13 orders, 78 families, and about 24000 species. The important characteristics are Contain many woody species Centrifugal maturation of stamens and binucleate pollen S5-Rosidae The subclass has 18 orders, 113 families, and about 60000 species. It is the largest subclass among the dicotyledons. Characteristics The flower has numerous stamens that mature in centripetal sequence.
    [Show full text]
  • Phylogenetic Relationships of Monocots Based on the Highly Informative Plastid Gene Ndhf Thomas J
    Aliso: A Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Botany Volume 22 | Issue 1 Article 4 2006 Phylogenetic Relationships of Monocots Based on the Highly Informative Plastid Gene ndhF Thomas J. Givnish University of Wisconsin-Madison J. Chris Pires University of Wisconsin-Madison; University of Missouri Sean W. Graham University of British Columbia Marc A. McPherson University of Alberta; Duke University Linda M. Prince Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Gardens See next page for additional authors Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.claremont.edu/aliso Part of the Botany Commons Recommended Citation Givnish, Thomas J.; Pires, J. Chris; Graham, Sean W.; McPherson, Marc A.; Prince, Linda M.; Patterson, Thomas B.; Rai, Hardeep S.; Roalson, Eric H.; Evans, Timothy M.; Hahn, William J.; Millam, Kendra C.; Meerow, Alan W.; Molvray, Mia; Kores, Paul J.; O'Brien, Heath W.; Hall, Jocelyn C.; Kress, W. John; and Sytsma, Kenneth J. (2006) "Phylogenetic Relationships of Monocots Based on the Highly Informative Plastid Gene ndhF," Aliso: A Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Botany: Vol. 22: Iss. 1, Article 4. Available at: http://scholarship.claremont.edu/aliso/vol22/iss1/4 Phylogenetic Relationships of Monocots Based on the Highly Informative Plastid Gene ndhF Authors Thomas J. Givnish, J. Chris Pires, Sean W. Graham, Marc A. McPherson, Linda M. Prince, Thomas B. Patterson, Hardeep S. Rai, Eric H. Roalson, Timothy M. Evans, William J. Hahn, Kendra C. Millam, Alan W. Meerow, Mia Molvray, Paul J. Kores, Heath W. O'Brien, Jocelyn C. Hall, W. John Kress, and Kenneth J. Sytsma This article is available in Aliso: A Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Botany: http://scholarship.claremont.edu/aliso/vol22/iss1/ 4 Aliso 22, pp.
    [Show full text]
  • CRONQUIST's SYSTEM of CLASSIFICATION
    CRONQUIST’s SYSTEM OF CLASSIFICATION Contents • Introduction •Basis of Classification •Class Magnoliopsida •Class Liliopsida •Merits •De-Mertis •Principles of Classification Arthur Lyman John Cronquist (1919 -1992) was a United States botanist and a specialist on Compositae. He is considered one of the most influential botanists of the 20th century, largely due to his formulation of the Cronquist system OF Classification BASIS OF CLASSIFICATION This system of classification is an elaboration of Bessey’s system of classification and a refinement over Takhtajan’s system (1964), which is based on morphological, anatomical, embryological, palynological, serological, cytological, chemical as well as ultra structural evidences. According to Cronquist’s system of classification, the angiosperms have been divided into two Classes The Cronquist system is a taxonomic classification system of flowering plants. It was developed by Arthur Cronquist in his texts An Integrated System of Classification of Flowering Plants (1981) and The Evolution and Classification of Flowering Plants (1968; 2nd edition, 1988). • Cronquist's system places flowering plants into two broad classes, Magnoliopsida (dicotyledons) and Liliopsida (monocotyledons). Within these classes, related orders are grouped into subclasses. • The scheme is still widely used, in either the original form or in adapted versions, but some botanists are adopting the Angiosperm Phylogeny Group classification for the orders and families of flowering plants: APG III. • The system as laid out in An Integrated System of Classification of Flowering Plants (1981) counts 321 families and 64 orders in class Magnoliopsida and 19 orders and 65 families in class Liliopsida • Class Magnoliopsida 1. Subclass Magnoliidae (mostly basal dicots)(8 Orders, 39 families) 2.
    [Show full text]