DOCSLIB.ORG

Qiu Et Al. Fig.S2.1-1

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Qiu Et Al. Fig.S2.1-1 Fig. S2.1-1: gymnosperms & basal angiosperms monocots & eudicots Hedycarya 54 Peumus 55 Hernandia 86 97Gyrocarpus Cryptocarya 47 88 Laurus Daphnandra 84 58Atherosperma 85 72 Siparuna 12 Gomortega Idiospermum 100Calycanthus Annona 79 100 94 Cananga 89 Eupomatia 56 Galbulimima 98 Magnolia 98 78Liriodendron 100 Degeneria Myristica 64 100Mauloutchia Piper 100 Peperomia 100 Houttuynia 74Saururus 98 Thottea 48 100Aristolochia 86 Saruma 84 Lactoris Drimys 99 98 100 Tasmannia Takhtajania 100 Canella 100Cinnamodendron Chloranthus 100 Sarcandra 92 99 Ascarina 65 Hedyosmum Ceratophyllum sub 100 100 Ceratophyllum dem Kadsura 100 100 Schisandra 91 Illicium 100 Trimenia Austrobaileya Cabomba 80 Brasenia 63 80 Nuphar Nymphaea 89 Trithuria lan 79 100Trithuria inc Amborella Gnetum 100 75 Welwitschia Pinus 99 Metasequoia 95 100Podocarpus Ginkgo Zamia 100Cycas Fig. S2.1-2: monocots & basal eudicots other eudicots 91 99 Buxus 99 Pachysandra 88 Didymeles 98 Tetracentron 48 Trochodendron 100 Petrophile 91 Roupala 59 64 Platanus Nelumbo 98 Meliosma Sabia 91 Glaucidium 98 Ranunculus 98 Hydrastis 99 Caulophyllum 99 49 Nandina Decaisnea 27 75Lardizabala Sargentodoxa 99 66 Euptelea 14 Dicentra 68 85 Eschscholzia Hypecoum Tinospora 100Menispermum 76 Philydrum Tradescantia 83 Strelitzia 100Maranta 99 84 Stegolepis 100Oryza 19 96 Vriesea 98Sparganium 55 Chamaedorea Smilax 62 67 Lilium 95 Trillium 99 Tacca 96 Dioscorea Carludovica 100Croomia Lomandra 91 100 Agave 80 Beaucarnea 89 87Asparagus 100 Allium 87 Xanthorrhoea 96 Iris 95 Blandfordia 94 Oncidium Potamogeton 100 100 Triglochin 71 Alisma Acorus cal 76 100Acorus gra Pleea 84 85Tofieldia 100 Spathiphyllum 98 Xanthosoma Orontium Fig. S2.1-3: Gunnerales/rosids exclusive of the COM-malvids Saxifragales, Berberidopsidales, Dilleniales, Santalales, Caryophyllales, asterids, the COM & malvids Myrica 94 Alnus 100 96 Juglans Quercus 99 100Chrysolepis Nothofagus 28 40 Cucurbita 59Begonia 26 100 Anisophyllea Datisca 51Coriaria Morus 28 63 Pilea 81 99 Urtica Cannabis 47 98 82Celtis 99 Zelkova 51 72 74 Elaeagnus 92Ceanothus Spiraea Albizia 100 Medicago 70 Stylobasium 99 58Polygala Quillaja Staphylea 67 99 Crossosoma Stachyurus 73 42 61 Guaiacum 100Krameria 22 Aphloia Strasburgeria 90 99 59 Ixerba Geissoloma 96 Olinia 100 Crypteronia Clidemia 48 35 Qualea 78 46Myrtus 89 Oenothera 96Lythrum Terminalia 14 98 Wendtia 95 Viviania 38 Melianthus Geranium 100 Vitis Leea 94 Gunnera Myrothamnus Fig. S2.1-4: the COM & malvids Clusia 100 21 Hypericum Bruguiera 30 45Hirtella 33 Malpighia 100Elatine Humiria 27 Hydnocarpus 72 100 8 Ixonanthes Passiflora 34 86 Viola Populus 24 Phyllanthus 100 Reinwardtia 98 Drypetes 34 54 Euphorbia Ochna Hua 91 95 Cephalotus 52 Brunellia 28 Elaeocarpus 99 Geissois 66 Oxalis 100 Connarus Brexia 100 100 Euonymus 100 Parnassia Ruptiliocarpon 100 Arabidopsis 100 Capparis 100 Reseda 96 Batis 98 Floerkea 98 Carica 87 70 Tropaeolum Helianthemum 50 78Anisoptera 32 Bixa 14 Gossypium 100Sterculia 83 Thymelaea Tapiscia 25 Ailanthus 74 Citrus 100 Bursera 38 100 90 Swietenia 100 Cupaniopsis Nitraria 64Schinus Dipentodon asterids Pereskia 100 Opuntia Fig. S2.1-5: Saxifragales/ 73 17 Portulaca Dilleniales/Berberidopsidales/ 71 Calyptrotheca 98 Santalales/Caryophyllales 76 Alluaudia 81 Talinum Basella 87 Claytonia Halophytum 73 Lampranthus 41 60 52 Phytolacca 54 Sarcobatus 98 Rivina Bougainvillea 16 85Mirabilis 96 Mollugo 49Barbeuia 100 Celosia 100 64 Spinacia 95 Stellaria 75 Limeum Stegnosperma 31 Rhabdodendron 35 77 Physena Simmondsia 51 100 Tamarix Frankenia Dioncophyllum 81 100 54 Triphyophyllum 85 Ancistrocladus 80 Drosophyllum Drosera 37 61Nepenthes Polygonum 100 38 97 Bistorta Limonium 91 Santalum 46 Schoepfia 97 Gaiadendron 96 Opilia 95 Ximenia Heisteria 100 Tetracera 100 Hibbertia 64 Dillenia Aextoxicon 98Berberidopsis Haloragis 100 100 Myriophyllum 15 77 Penthorum 100 Tetracarpaea 100 Aphanopetalum Kalanchoe 100Sedum 75 Heuchera 97 100Saxifraga 87 Ribes Choristylis 100Itea Rhodoleia 100 96 Exbucklandia 80 Hamamelis 35 100Corylopsis 96 Daphniphyllum 45 79 Cercidiphyllum Liquidambar 70 100Altingia Paeonia sp 100Paeonia ten Peridiscus Fig. S2.1-6: Cornales/campanulids Ericales/lamiids Scaevola 100 93 Dampiera 64 Helianthus Corokia 56 69Phelline Menyanthes 98 72Donatia 94 Alseuosmia Roussea 100 3 99Campanula 35 Pentaphragma 33 Escallonia 26 Berzelia 93 Sphenostemon 43 Paracryphia Polyosma 100 Quintinia 50 Valeriana 12 59 Dipsacus 53 Morina 100 Linnaea 100 Lonicera 2 Viburnum 40 Myodocarpus 86 2752 Hedera 50 Apium 99 Pittosporum 56 31 Griselinia Pennantia 7 21 Desfontainia Eremosyne 96 Eucommia Garrya 75 Phyllonoma 53 99 Helwingia Ilex Icacina 81 Hydrangea 73 Mentzelia 18 Cornus 55Nyssa Curtisia Fig. S2.1-7: Ericales/lamiids Lamium 74 Byblis 38 Scrophularia 45 30Antirrhinum Verbena 7 48Pinguicula 41 Catalpa 97 Sesamum 92 Acanthus Saintpaulia 78 96Calceolaria 78 Peltanthera Syringa Strychnos 72 6 92 Nerium Gentiana 71 Luculia 84 85Galium 16 Gelsemium Hydrophyllum 45 91Ehretia 100 Borago 93 Hydrolea 76 Sphenoclea 56 Montinia 4 Ipomoea 81Nicotiana Vahlia 88 Clavija 79 Androsace 99 Styrax 59 4 Maesa 30 Diospyros Camellia 76 27 Cyrilla 96 69 Arbutus 64 Clethra 29 Ternstroemia Galax 8 Sarracenia 17 43 9 Manilkara 48 Actinidia Idria 99 Couroupita 98 Impatiens 100 Marcgravia Tetramerista Oncotheca.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Creation and Carnivory in the Pitcher Plants of Nepenthaceae and Sarraceniaceae
    OPEN ACCESS JCTS Article SERIES B Creation and Carnivory in the Pitcher Plants of Nepenthaceae and Sarraceniaceae R.W. Sanders and T.C. Wood Core Academy of Science, Dayton, TN Abstract The morphological adaptations of carnivorous plants and taxonomic distributions of those adaptations are reviewed, as are the conflicting classifications of the plants based on the adaptations, reproductive morphology, and DNA sequences. To begin developing a creationist understanding of the origin of plant carnivory, we here focus specifically on pitcher plants of Nepenthaceae and Sarraceniaceae because their popularity as cultivated curiosities has generated a literature resource amenable to baraminological analysis. Hybridization records were augmented by total nucleotide differences to assess species similarities. Nonhybridizing species falling within the molecular range of hybridizing species were included in the monobaramin of the hybridizing species. The combined data support each of the three genera of the Sarraceniaceae as a monobaramin, but the three could not be combined into a larger monobaramin. With the Nepenthaceae, the data unequivocally place 73% of the species in a single monobaramin, strongly suggesting the whole genus (and, thus, family) is a monobaramin. The lack of variation in the carnivorous habit provides no evidence for the intrabaraminic origin of carnivory from non-carnivorous plants. An array of fascinating symbiotic relationships of pitchers in some species with unusual bacteria, insects, and vertebrates are known and suggest the origin of carnivory from benign functions of the adaptive structures. However, these symbioses still do not account for the apparent complex design for carnivory characteristic of all species in the two families. Editor: J.W.
    [Show full text]
  • Systematic Botany. Lecture 38
    BIOL 448.38 Systematic Botany. Lecture 38 Alexey Shipunov Minot State University December 5, 2011 BIOL 448.38 Outline Questions and answers Angiosperms Rosidae, part 2 BIOL 448.38 Outline Questions and answers Angiosperms Rosidae, part 2 I The goal was to remember the key characters, plus (possibly) some representatives BIOL 448.38 Questions and answers Previous final question: the answer Give the short characteristic of any of 7 orders studied. BIOL 448.38 Questions and answers Previous final question: the answer Give the short characteristic of any of 7 orders studied. I The goal was to remember the key characters, plus (possibly) some representatives BIOL 448.38 Questions and answers General phylogeny of angiosperms groups studied so far other rosids Myrtales Geraniales Vitales Saxifragales Asteridae Dilleniales Platanales Ranunculales Liliidae Piperales Laurales Magnoliales Chloranthales ANTITA BIOL 448.38 Angiosperms Rosidae, part 2 Angiosperms Rosidae, part 2 BIOL 448.38 Angiosperms Rosidae, part 2 BIOL 448.38 Angiosperms Rosidae, part 2 BIOL 448.38 Angiosperms Rosidae, part 2 BIOL 448.38 Angiosperms Rosidae, part 2 BIOL 448.38 Angiosperms Rosidae, part 2 BIOL 448.38 Angiosperms Rosidae, part 2 BIOL 448.38 Angiosperms Rosidae, part 2 BIOL 448.38 Angiosperms Rosidae, part 2 BIOL 448.38 Angiosperms Rosidae, part 2 General phylogeny + all rosids Malpighiales Oxalidales Celastrales Cucurbitales Fagales Rosales Fabales Malvales Brassicales Sapindales Myrtales Geraniales Vitales Saxifragales Asteridae Dilleniales Platanales Ranunculales Liliidae Piperales Laurales Magnoliales Chloranthales ANTITA Give the short characteristic of any of orders studied. BIOL 448.38 Angiosperms Rosidae, part 2 Final question (3 points) BIOL 448.38 Angiosperms Rosidae, part 2 Final question (3 points) Give the short characteristic of any of orders studied.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to Common Native & Invasive Freshwater Plants in Alaska
    Introduction to Common Native & Potential Invasive Freshwater Plants in Alaska Cover photographs by (top to bottom, left to right): Tara Chestnut/Hannah E. Anderson, Jamie Fenneman, Vanessa Morgan, Dana Visalli, Jamie Fenneman, Lynda K. Moore and Denny Lassuy. Introduction to Common Native & Potential Invasive Freshwater Plants in Alaska This document is based on An Aquatic Plant Identification Manual for Washington’s Freshwater Plants, which was modified with permission from the Washington State Department of Ecology, by the Center for Lakes and Reservoirs at Portland State University for Alaska Department of Fish and Game US Fish & Wildlife Service - Coastal Program US Fish & Wildlife Service - Aquatic Invasive Species Program December 2009 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgments ............................................................................ x Introduction Overview ............................................................................. xvi How to Use This Manual .................................................... xvi Categories of Special Interest Imperiled, Rare and Uncommon Aquatic Species ..................... xx Indigenous Peoples Use of Aquatic Plants .............................. xxi Invasive Aquatic Plants Impacts ................................................................................. xxi Vectors ................................................................................. xxii Prevention Tips .................................................... xxii Early Detection and Reporting
    [Show full text]
  • Widespread Paleopolyploidy, Gene Tree Conflict, and Recalcitrant Relationships Among the 3 Carnivorous Caryophyllales1 4 5 Joseph F
    bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/115741; this version posted March 10, 2017. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under aCC-BY-NC 4.0 International license. 1 2 Widespread paleopolyploidy, gene tree conflict, and recalcitrant relationships among the 3 carnivorous Caryophyllales1 4 5 Joseph F. Walker*,2, Ya Yang2,5, Michael J. Moore3, Jessica Mikenas3, Alfonso Timoneda4, Samuel F. 6 Brockington4 and Stephen A. Smith*,2 7 8 2Department of Ecology & Evolutionary Biology, University of Michigan, 830 North University Avenue, 9 Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1048, USA 10 3Department of Biology, Oberlin College, Science Center K111, 119 Woodland St., Oberlin, Ohio 44074- 11 1097 USA 12 4Department of Plant Sciences, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 3EA, United Kingdom 13 5 Department of Plant Biology, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities. 1445 Gortner Avenue, St. Paul, MN 14 55108 15 CORRESPONDING AUTHORS: Joseph F. Walker; [email protected] and Stephen A. Smith; 16 [email protected] 17 18 1Manuscript received ____; revision accepted ______. bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/115741; this version posted March 10, 2017. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under aCC-BY-NC 4.0 International license. 19 ABSTRACT 20 • The carnivorous members of the large, hyperdiverse Caryophyllales (e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • A Visual Guide to Collecting Plant Tissues for DNA
    A visual guide to collecting plant tissues for DNA Collecting kit checklist Silica gel1 Permanent marker and pencil Resealable bags, airtight plastic container Razor blade / Surgical scissors Empty tea bags or coffee filters Ethanol and paper tissue or ethanol wipes Tags or jewellers tags Plant press and collecting book 1. Selection and preparation of fresh plant tissue: Sampling avoided. Breaking up leaf material will bruise the plant tissue, which will result in enzymes being released From a single plant, harvest 3 – 5 mature leaves, or that cause DNA degradation. Ideally, leaf material sample a piece of a leaf, if large (Picture A). Ideally should be cut into smaller fragments with thick a leaf area of 5 – 10 cm2 should be enough, but this midribs being removed (Picture C). If sampling robust amount should be adjusted if the plant material is leaf tissue (e.g. cycads, palms), use a razor blade or rich in water (e.g. a succulent plant). If leaves are surgical scissors (Picture D). small (e.g. ericoid leaves), sample enough material to equate a leaf area of 5 – 10 cm2. If no leaves are Succulent plants available, other parts can be sampled such as leaf buds, flowers, bracts, seeds or even fresh bark. If the If the leaves are succulent, use a razor blade to plant is small, select the biggest specimen, but never remove epidermal slices or scoop out parenchyma combine tissues from different individuals. tissue (Picture E). Cleaning Ideally, collect clean fresh tissues, however if the leaf or plant material is dirty or shows potential contamination (e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • Acorus Calamus : an Overview
    Journal of Medicinal Plants Research Vol. 4(25), pp. 2740-2745, December Special Review, 2010 Available online at http://www.academicjournals.org/JMPR ISSN 1996-0875 ©2010 Academic Journals Review Acorus calamus : An overview R. Balakumbahan*, K. Rajamani and K. Kumanan Horticultural Research Station, TamilNadu Agricultural University, Pechiparai, 629161. Tamilnadu, India. Accepted 8 July, 2010 Acorus calamus (Sweet flag) is a wetland perennial monocot plant, in which the scented leaves and rhizomes have been traditionally used medicinally against different ailments like, fever, asthma, bronchitis, cough and mainly for digestive problems such as gas, bloating, colic, and poor digestive function. Number of active constituents and essential oil were identified and characterized from the leaves and rhizomes of sweet flag. An over view of the pharmacological activities and insecticidal activities are summarized here. Key words: Acorus calamus, Acorus gramineus , Acoraceae, active constituents, pharmacology. INTRODUCTION Mother earth has bestowed to the mankind and various Estimate reveals that the world trade in medicinal plants plants with healing ability for curing the ailments of and extracts industry was growing at a rate of 12 to 15% human being. This unique feature has been identified per annum. The export from India is to the tune of Rs 446 since pre historic times. The WHO has also estimated crores with the present growth rate of 7%. Acorus that 80% of the world population meets their primary calamus is a tall perennial wetland monocot plant from health care needs through traditional medicine only. the Acoraceae family. The scented leaves and rhizomes Medicinal plants are those plants possessing secondary of sweet flag have been traditionally used as a medicine metabolites and are potential sources of curative drugs and the dried and powdered rhizome has a spicy flavour with the very long list of chemicals and its curative nature.
    [Show full text]
  • GENOME EVOLUTION in MONOCOTS a Dissertation
    GENOME EVOLUTION IN MONOCOTS A Dissertation Presented to The Faculty of the Graduate School At the University of Missouri In Partial Fulfillment Of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy By Kate L. Hertweck Dr. J. Chris Pires, Dissertation Advisor JULY 2011 The undersigned, appointed by the dean of the Graduate School, have examined the dissertation entitled GENOME EVOLUTION IN MONOCOTS Presented by Kate L. Hertweck A candidate for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy And hereby certify that, in their opinion, it is worthy of acceptance. Dr. J. Chris Pires Dr. Lori Eggert Dr. Candace Galen Dr. Rose‐Marie Muzika ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I am indebted to many people for their assistance during the course of my graduate education. I would not have derived such a keen understanding of the learning process without the tutelage of Dr. Sandi Abell. Members of the Pires lab provided prolific support in improving lab techniques, computational analysis, greenhouse maintenance, and writing support. Team Monocot, including Dr. Mike Kinney, Dr. Roxi Steele, and Erica Wheeler were particularly helpful, but other lab members working on Brassicaceae (Dr. Zhiyong Xiong, Dr. Maqsood Rehman, Pat Edger, Tatiana Arias, Dustin Mayfield) all provided vital support as well. I am also grateful for the support of a high school student, Cady Anderson, and an undergraduate, Tori Docktor, for their assistance in laboratory procedures. Many people, scientist and otherwise, helped with field collections: Dr. Travis Columbus, Hester Bell, Doug and Judy McGoon, Julie Ketner, Katy Klymus, and William Alexander. Many thanks to Barb Sonderman for taking care of my greenhouse collection of many odd plants brought back from the field.
    [Show full text]
  • Phylogenomic Approach
    Toward the ultimate phylogeny of Magnoliaceae: phylogenomic approach Sangtae Kim*1, Suhyeon Park1, and Jongsun Park2 1 Sungshin University, Korea 2 InfoBoss Co., Korea Mr. Carl Ferris Miller Founder of Chollipo Arboretum in Korea Chollipo Arboretum Famous for its magnolia collection 2020. Annual Meeting of Magnolia Society International Cholliop Arboretum in Korea. April 13th~22th, 2020 http://WWW.Chollipo.org Sungshin University, Seoul, Korea Dr. Hans Nooteboom Dr. Liu Yu-Hu Twenty-one years ago... in 1998 The 1st International Symposium on the Family Magnoliaceae, Gwangzhow Dr. Hiroshi Azuma Mr. Richard Figlar Dr. Hans Nooteboom Dr. Qing-wen Zeng Dr. Weibang Sun Handsome young boy Dr. Yong-kang Sima Dr. Yu-wu Law Presented ITS study on Magnoliaceae - never published Ten years ago... in 2009 Presented nine cp genome region study (9.2 kbp) on Magnoliaceae – published in 2013 2015 1st International Sympodium on Neotropical Magnoliaceae Gadalajara, 2019 3rd International Sympodium and Workshop on Neotropical Magnoliaceae Asterales Dipsacales Apiales Why magnolia study is Aquifoliales Campanulids (Euasterids II) Garryales Gentianales Laminales Solanales Lamiids important in botany? Ericales Asterids (Euasterids I) Cornales Sapindales Malvales Brassicales Malvids Fagales (Eurosids II) • As a member of early-diverging Cucurbitales Rosales Fabales Zygophyllales Celestrales Fabids (Eurosid I) angiosperms, reconstruction of the Oxalidales Malpighiales Vitales Geraniales Myrtales Rosids phylogeny of Magnoliaceae will Saxifragales Caryphyllales
    [Show full text]
  • Phylogeny of the SE Australian Clade of Hibbertia Subg. Hemistemma (Dilleniaceae)
    Phylogeny of the SE Australian clade of Hibbertia subg. Hemistemma (Dilleniaceae) Ihsan Abdl Azez Abdul Raheem School of Earth and Environmental Sciences The University of Adelaide A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy of the University of Adelaide June 2012 The University of Adelaide, SA, Australia Declaration I, Ihsan Abdl Azez Abdul Raheem certify that this work contains no materials which has been accepted for the award of any other degree or diploma in any universities or other tertiary institution and, to the best of my knowledge and belief, contains no materials previously published or written by another person, except where due reference has been made in the text. I give consent to this copy of my thesis, when deposited in the University Library, being made available for photocopying, subject to the provisions of the Copyright Act 1968. I also give permission for the digital version of my thesis to be made available on the web, via the University digital research repository, the Library catalogue, the Australian Digital Thesis Program (ADTP) and also through web search engine, unless permission has been granted by the University to restrict access for a period of time. ii This thesis is dedicated to my loving family and parents iii Acknowledgments The teacher who is indeed wise does not bid you to enter the house of his wisdom but rather leads you to the threshold of your mind--Khalil Gibran First and foremost, I wish to thank my supervisors Dr John G. Conran, Dr Terry Macfarlane and Dr Kevin Thiele for their support, encouragement, valuable feedback and assistance over the past three years (data analyses and writing) guiding me through my PhD candidature.
    [Show full text]
  • Ancistrocladus Benomensis (Ancistrocladaceae): a New Species from Peninsular Malaysia
    BLUMEA 50: 357–365 Published on 14 July 2005 http://dx.doi.org/10.3767/000651905X623021 ANCISTROCLADUS BENOMENSIS (ANCISTROCLADACEAE): A NEW SPECIES FROM PENINSULAR MALAYSIA H. RISCHER1,2,5, G. HEUBL3, H. MEIMBERG3, M. DREYER2, H.A. HADI 4 & G. BRINGMANN1,5 SUMMARY Ancistrocladus benomensis Rischer & G. Bringmann, a new species from Gunung Benom, Malaysia is described and illustrated. Diagnostic notes concerning morphology, occurrence of specific naphthyl­ isoquinoline alkaloids, and support from molecular analyses are provided. Key words: Ancistrocladus benomensis, Ancistrocladaceae, Gunung Benom, Malaysia. INTRODUCTION The monotypic genus Ancistrocladus Wall. (Ancistrocladaceae) comprises approxi­ mately 20 species (Gereau, 1997) and is characterized by a disjunct distribution in the palaeotropics with two areas of speciation, one in tropical West and Central Africa and one in South East Asia. All taxa are scandent shrubs or woody lianas with tendril­ like modified shoots provided with characteristic circinate woody hooks as climbing devices. Recently a synoptic revision of the African taxa of the genus Ancistrocladus has been presented by Cheek (2000), with an identification key and detailed information concerning taxonomy, distribution, and ecology of the 13 species recognized. For the Asian taxa an equivalent comprehensive study is still lacking and there is much uncertainty in the delimitation of taxa as well as on ecological preferences, seed set, pollination, and flowering rhythm. Concerning taxonomy one has to refer to a synopsis presented by Gilg (1925) and to an annotated checklist of species which was compiled by Gereau (1997) based on a survey of local floras. In this latter overview a detailed account on the typification for 25 binominals is presented, including 12 valid species recognized by the author for South East Asia: A.
    [Show full text]
  • Ancistrocladaceae
    Soltis et al—American Journal of Botany 98(4):704-730. 2011. – Data Supplement S2 – page 1 Soltis, Douglas E., Stephen A. Smith, Nico Cellinese, Kenneth J. Wurdack, David C. Tank, Samuel F. Brockington, Nancy F. Refulio-Rodriguez, Jay B. Walker, Michael J. Moore, Barbara S. Carlsward, Charles D. Bell, Maribeth Latvis, Sunny Crawley, Chelsea Black, Diaga Diouf, Zhenxiang Xi, Catherine A. Rushworth, Matthew A. Gitzendanner, Kenneth J. Sytsma, Yin-Long Qiu, Khidir W. Hilu, Charles C. Davis, Michael J. Sanderson, Reed S. Beaman, Richard G. Olmstead, Walter S. Judd, Michael J. Donoghue, and Pamela S. Soltis. Angiosperm phylogeny: 17 genes, 640 taxa. American Journal of Botany 98(4): 704-730. Appendix S2. The maximum likelihood majority-rule consensus from the 17-gene analysis shown as a phylogram with mtDNA included for Polyosma. Names of the orders and families follow APG III (2009); other names follow Cantino et al. (2007). Numbers above branches are bootstrap percentages. 67 Acalypha Spathiostemon 100 Ricinus 97 100 Dalechampia Lasiocroton 100 100 Conceveiba Homalanthus 96 Hura Euphorbia 88 Pimelodendron 100 Trigonostemon Euphorbiaceae Codiaeum (incl. Peraceae) 100 Croton Hevea Manihot 10083 Moultonianthus Suregada 98 81 Tetrorchidium Omphalea 100 Endospermum Neoscortechinia 100 98 Pera Clutia Pogonophora 99 Cespedesia Sauvagesia 99 Luxemburgia Ochna Ochnaceae 100 100 53 Quiina Touroulia Medusagyne Caryocar Caryocaraceae 100 Chrysobalanus 100 Atuna Chrysobalananaceae 100 100 Licania Hirtella 100 Euphronia Euphroniaceae 100 Dichapetalum 100
    [Show full text]
  • The Descent of the Flowering Plants in the Light of New Evidence from Phytochemistry and from Other Sources
    The descent of the flowering plants in the light of new evidence from phytochemistry and from other sources. I. General discussion A.D.J. Meeuse Hugo de Vries-laboratorium en Hortus Botanicus, Amsterdam SUMMARY Accumulated phytochemical data partially compiled by Kubitzki in 1969, and evidence from various other sources point to a fundamental heterogeneity of the Flowering Plants, which is interpretedby the present author as an unmistakable indication of a multiple descent of the Angiosperms. The consequences of this viewpoint for taxonomic classifications and for phy- In logenetic speculations must be faced. view of the possible misunderstandingof some poin- ters, and in order to avoid erroneous interpretations of the accumulated evidence, a survey of the relevant data be indicated. Some tentative future appears to proposals concerning a classification of the will be made in the second of this Angiosperms part paper. 1. INTRODUCTION 1 Recently, Kubitzki (1969) pointed out that cogent phytochemical evidence renders a close relationship between the Polycarpicae or Ranales(s.l.) and sever- The of his discus- al other groups of the Dicotyledons most unlikely. corollary sion is that the Dicots (and, by inference, the Angiosperms) are rather hetero- geneous and did not all arise from a ranalean ancestral group, and that, in point kind of of fact, the ranalean alliance is more likely to represent a phylogenetic cul-de-sac. Most hesitatingly, Kubitzki admits the possibility of a multiple to statement descent of the Flowering Plants, referring a made over fifteenyears ago by Metcalfe (who suggested that the assumption of a polyphyletic origin of the Angiosperms may well provide the best explanation of the great diversity of their anatomicalfeatures) but, strangely enough, not mentioning more recent contributions dealing with the question of a single versus a multiple descent.
    [Show full text]