DOCSLIB.ORG

Comparative Pollen Morphology and Ultrastructure of Mentheae Subtribe

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Comparative Pollen Morphology and Ultrastructure of Mentheae Subtribe Available online at www.sciencedirect.com Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology 149 (2008) 174–186 www.elsevier.com/locate/revpalbo Comparative pollen morphology and ultrastructure of Mentheae subtribe Nepetinae (Lamiaceae) ⁎ Hye-Kyoung Moon a, , Stefan Vinckier a,b, Erik Smets a,c, Suzy Huysmans a a Laboratory of Plant Systematics, Institute of Botany and Microbiology, K.U. Leuven, Kasteelpark Arenberg 31, P.O. Box 2437, BE-3001 Leuven, Belgium b Center for Transgene Technology and Gene therapy, Flanders Institute for Biotechnology (VIB-3), K.U. Leuven, campus Gasthuisberg, Herestraat 49, BE-3000 Leuven, Belgium c National Herbarium of The Netherlands, Leiden University Branch, P.O. Box 9514, NL-2300 RA Leiden, The Netherlands Received 6 September 2007; received in revised form 22 November 2007; accepted 1 December 2007 Available online 15 December 2007 Abstract This study provides new pollen data of 52 representative species belonging to all 12 genera in the currently classification of the subtribe Nepetinae, and considers the possible presence of orbicules for the first time. Pollen morphology and ultrastructure were investigated with light, scanning electron and transmission electron microscopy. Nepetinae pollen is small to large (P=16–65 µm, E=17–53 µm), oblate to prolate (P/E=0.7–1.6) in shape and mostly hexacolpate (sometimes octocolpate). The exine stratification in all taxa studied is similar and characterized by unbranched columellae and a continuous, granular endexine. Sexine ornamentation in the Nepetinae is bireticulate, microreticulate or perforate. In perforate and microreticulate pattern a tendency towards a bireticulum could be recognized due to trace of secondary tectal connections. The bireticulate pattern is most common with variations of primary muri and secondary reticulum. In Hymenocrater and Schizonepeta the observed variation of sexine ornamentation is particularly valuable at the generic level. Pollen data support Lophanthus and Nepeta as very closely allied and Lallemantia is clearly distinct from Dracocephalum. The formerly suggested infrageneric relationships within Dracocephalum and Nepeta are only partly corroborated by palynological characters. Orbicules are absent in the Nepetinae. © 2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Keywords: Nepetoideae; orbicules; palynology; Nepetinae; sexine ornamentation; ultrastructure 1. Introduction etically informative (Moon et al., in press). The present study aims to further elucidate the palynological diversity within the Pollen of the Lamiaceae has been intensively studied since tribe Mentheae, focusing on the subtribe Nepetinae sensu Erdtman (1945) suggested a division of the family into two Harley et al. (2004). The Nepetinae differs from the two other subfamilies based on aperture number and number of nuclei in subtribes in Mentheae, Salviinae and Menthinae in the length of the mature pollen grains (Lamioideae: tricolpate and bi-nucleate the posterior pair of stamens and the number of calyx nerves pollen, Nepetoideae: hexacolpate and tri-nucleate pollen). (Wagstaff, 1992). Nepetinae sensu Harley et al. (2004) consists However, the tribe Mentheae (Nepetoideae), which includes of 12 genera (ca. 350 species) distributed over large parts of nearly one fourth in all taxa within the Lamiaceae taxa, is still Eurasia and North America (Harley et al., 2004). poorly known from a palynological point of view. In an attempt Nepeta is the largest (ca. 200 sp.) and economically most to fill this knowledge gap, we have presented a detailed pollen important genus in the Nepetinae. It can be subdivided into study of subtribe Salviinae (Mentheae), showing that variations several sections and subsections by habit, leaf morphology, of sexine ornamentation in the pollen characters are phylogen- inflorescence, calyx and corolla structure, and nutlet characters (Bentham, 1848; Briquet, 1897; Pojarkova, 1954; Budantsev, 1993a; Budantsev and Lobova, 1997). Based on phylogenetic ⁎ Corresponding author. Tel.: +32 16 32 1535; fax: +32 16 32 1955. analysis of molecular data, Jamzad et al. (2003) concluded that E-mail address: [email protected] (H.-K. Moon). Nepeta is monophyletic but also that previous infrageneric 0034-6667/$ - see front matter © 2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.revpalbo.2007.12.001 H.-K. Moon et al. / Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology 149 (2008) 174–186 175 Table 1 Overview of palynological characters of species studied within Nepetinae based on acetolysed pollen grains Species T P (µm) E (µm) Shape AI CL (µm) Exine (µm) SE O So Os S Ps Sp P Agastache J.Clayton ex Gronov. A. palmeri A39–44.2–52 30–36.0–41 −− − −++++0.12–0.22 26–33.7–43 1.2–1.5 III-e A. scrophulariifolia A33–37.4–42 30–33.1–37 −− ± ± ++ + − 0.16–0.21 25–27.6–31 1.2–2.1 III A. urticifolia A32–37.6–41 26–27.6–29 −− − −− +++/27–29.1–34 1.1–1.2 III-e A. urticifolia A30–36.5–45 31–35.8–41 −− − −±+++0.12–0.15 24–30.4–37 1.0–1.4 III-e A. urticifolia C19–20.7–22 23–24.5–26 ++ ++−− − − 0.12–0.16 16–17.1–18 / III-e Cedronella Moench Cedronella canariensis A43–44.8–48 32–36.2–43 −− − −+ − ++ 0.14–0.23 30–32.8–35 0.9–1.8 III-d Dracocephalum L. D. fragile A49–52.2–57 35–38.6–44 −− − −− +++/35–40.3–45 1.1–1.3 I-a D. grandiflorum A47–54.6–60 40–44.0–52 −− − −±++ /38–41.7–45 1.0–1.3 I-a D. heterophyllum A33–37.5–42 28–32.9–41 −− + − ++ ++ ± 0.18–0.22 26–28.6–33 1.1–1.8 I-a D. imberbe A28–31.7–38 22–24.7–29 −− − − ±+++0.24–0.31 20–23.5–28 1.0–1.4 I-a D. komarovii A35–39.1–41 32–35.0–42 −− ± − ++ ++ − 0.12–0.14 27–29.8–32 0.9–1.2 I-a D. nutans A34–39.4–42 30–33.5–37 −− ± ± ++ ++ ± 0.10–0.14 27–31.3–35 1.0–1.4 III-d D. palmatum A42–49.1–61 38–45.0–53 −− + − ++ + − 0.10–0.17 34–37.5–45 1.0–1.3 III-d D. parviflorum A39–41.6–45 30–35.2–38 −− − −±++− /27–31.2–35 1.0–1.5 I-b D. pinnatum A39–42.0–45 33–38.2–45 −− ± ± ++ + − 0.08–0.15 28–33.1–38 1.1–1.6 I-a D. ruyschiana A40–42.4–45 30–33.4–37 −− − −±++±/30–32.9–35 1.1–1.5 I-b D. ruyschiana C29–30.4–31 24–28.6–34 −− + − ++ + − /24–26.4–29 / I-b D. scrobiculatum A41–49.2–55 31–35.4–43 −− − −− ++ ++ /29–36.7–42 1.0–1.5 I-b D. stamineum A31–35.1–39 29–31.7–34 −− ± − ++ ++ ± 0.08–0.16 25–28.3–32 0.9–1.0 III-a D. subcapitatum A32–37.8–46 29–37.1–45 −− ± − +++±0.16–0.25 28–32.7–38 0.9–1.1 I-b Drephanocaryum Pojark. Drepanocaryum sewerzowii A25–27.9–30 27–29.5–31 − ±++±+−−0.12–0.23 20–23.6–26 1.0–1.5 III-b Drepanocaryum sewerzowii C16–16.8–17 20–21.5–23 − +++−− − − /12–12.7–13 / III-b Glechoma L. Glechoma hederacea A35–37.5–44 30–35.2–46 − ±++− + −−0.12–0.20 30–34.1–39 0.9–1.2 I-a Glechoma hederacea C22–25.2–30 17–23.5–28 −− ± −− ++/17–21.0–25 / I-a Hymenocrater Fisch. & C.A.Mey. Hymenocrater bituminosus C27–29.6–32 26–28.4–30 −− ± − +++− 0.11–0.16 22–23.2–25 / I-c Hymenocrater longiflorus A49–53.1–59 40–44.2–50 −− ± − +++±0.11–0.18 40–44.1–49 1.5–1.7 I-c Lallemantia Fisch. & C.A.Mey. Lallemantia peltata A26–27.7–30 24–27.1–29 −− ++ − ++ ± − /21–22.9–25 1.1–1.4 I-b Lallemantia peltata C16–18.0–19 22–23.3–24 +++−−−−−/14–15.4–16 / I-b Lallemantia royleana A26–28.1–31 23–27.1–29 −− ++ + ++ + − 0.17–0.21 22–23.6–27 0.9–1.3 III-e Lallemantia royleana C16–17.3–19 20–20.5–21 ±+ ++−− − − 0.14–0.23 11–13.7–16 / III-e Lophanthus Adans. Lophanthus chinensis A35–41.4–51 30–35.4–40 −− − −+++±0.12–0.23 30–34.6–38 1.0–1.3 III-c Lophanthus laxiflorus A26–28.4–32 25–28.4–34 − ±+++±− 0.19–0.24 20–21.4–25 0.8–1.1 III-e Lophanthus tschimganicus A31–34.6–38 29–33.0–39 −− ++ ± + + − 0.14–0.17 24–28.1–31 1.5–2.1 III-b Lophanthus tschimganicus C21–24.3–26 17–19.2–21 −− − −++++/18–20.9–23 / III-b Marmoritis Benth. Marmoritis rotundifolia C28–30.6–36 30–31.3–33 −− ++ − ++− 0.13–0.18 23–26.6–31 / III-e Meehania Britton Meehania urticifolia A51–57.8–65 38–44.1–53 −− − −±+++/40–45.9–55 1.2–1.5 III-e Meehania urticifolia C35–42.9–51 21–32.7–37 −− − −− ++ + /25–34.4–42 III-e Nepeta L. N. assurgens A25–28.9–33 25–27.5–30 − ±±±+++− 0.14–0.22 18–20.5–25 0.9–1.1 III-e N. cataria A27–29.4–32 26–29.5–33 − ±++++±− 0.12–0.16 20–21.9–24 0.9–1.0 III-e N. cataria C21–23.2–25 15–20.9–27 − ++ −−−++/17–19.5–22 / III-e N. cephalote C18–21.0–25 22–23.0–25 − ++ + −− − − /16–18.2–20 / III-e (continued on next page) 176 H.-K.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2016
    Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2016 Revised February 24, 2017 Compiled by Laura Gadd Robinson, Botanist John T. Finnegan, Information Systems Manager North Carolina Natural Heritage Program N.C. Department of Natural and Cultural Resources Raleigh, NC 27699-1651 www.ncnhp.org C ur Alleghany rit Ashe Northampton Gates C uc Surry am k Stokes P d Rockingham Caswell Person Vance Warren a e P s n Hertford e qu Chowan r Granville q ot ui a Mountains Watauga Halifax m nk an Wilkes Yadkin s Mitchell Avery Forsyth Orange Guilford Franklin Bertie Alamance Durham Nash Yancey Alexander Madison Caldwell Davie Edgecombe Washington Tyrrell Iredell Martin Dare Burke Davidson Wake McDowell Randolph Chatham Wilson Buncombe Catawba Rowan Beaufort Haywood Pitt Swain Hyde Lee Lincoln Greene Rutherford Johnston Graham Henderson Jackson Cabarrus Montgomery Harnett Cleveland Wayne Polk Gaston Stanly Cherokee Macon Transylvania Lenoir Mecklenburg Moore Clay Pamlico Hoke Union d Cumberland Jones Anson on Sampson hm Duplin ic Craven Piedmont R nd tla Onslow Carteret co S Robeson Bladen Pender Sandhills Columbus New Hanover Tidewater Coastal Plain Brunswick THE COUNTIES AND PHYSIOGRAPHIC PROVINCES OF NORTH CAROLINA Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2016 Compiled by Laura Gadd Robinson, Botanist John T. Finnegan, Information Systems Manager North Carolina Natural Heritage Program N.C. Department of Natural and Cultural Resources Raleigh, NC 27699-1651 www.ncnhp.org This list is dynamic and is revised frequently as new data become available. New species are added to the list, and others are dropped from the list as appropriate.
    [Show full text]
  • The Vascular Plants of Massachusetts
    The Vascular Plants of Massachusetts: The Vascular Plants of Massachusetts: A County Checklist • First Revision Melissa Dow Cullina, Bryan Connolly, Bruce Sorrie and Paul Somers Somers Bruce Sorrie and Paul Connolly, Bryan Cullina, Melissa Dow Revision • First A County Checklist Plants of Massachusetts: Vascular The A County Checklist First Revision Melissa Dow Cullina, Bryan Connolly, Bruce Sorrie and Paul Somers Massachusetts Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program The Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program (NHESP), part of the Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife, is one of the programs forming the Natural Heritage network. NHESP is responsible for the conservation and protection of hundreds of species that are not hunted, fished, trapped, or commercially harvested in the state. The Program's highest priority is protecting the 176 species of vertebrate and invertebrate animals and 259 species of native plants that are officially listed as Endangered, Threatened or of Special Concern in Massachusetts. Endangered species conservation in Massachusetts depends on you! A major source of funding for the protection of rare and endangered species comes from voluntary donations on state income tax forms. Contributions go to the Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Fund, which provides a portion of the operating budget for the Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program. NHESP protects rare species through biological inventory,
    [Show full text]
  • Approaches and Limitations of Species Level Diagnostics in Flowering Plants
    Genetic Food Diagnostics Approaches and Limitations of Species Level Diagnostics in Flowering Plants Zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades eines DOKTORS DER NATURWISSENSCHAFTEN (Dr. rer. nat.) Fakultät für Chemie und Biowissenschaften Karlsruher Institut für Technologie (KIT) - Universitätsbereich genehmigte DISSERTATION von Dipl. Biologe Thomas Horn aus 77709 Wolfach Dekan: Prof. Dr. Peter Roesky Referent: Prof. Dr. Peter Nick Korreferent: Prof. Dr. Horst Taraschewski Tag der mündlichen Prüfung: 17.04.2014 Parts of this work are derived from the following publications: Horn T, Völker J, Rühle M, Häser A, Jürges G, Nick P; 2013; Genetic authentication by RFLP versus ARMS? The case of Moldavian Dragonhead (Dracocephalum moldavica L.). European Food Research and Technology, doi 10.1007/s00217-013-2089-4 Horn T, Barth A, Rühle M, Häser A, Jürges G, Nick P; 2012; Molecular Diagnostics of Lemon Myrtle (Backhousia citriodora versus Leptospermum citratum). European Food Research and Technology, doi 10.1007/s00217-012-1688-9 Also included are works from the following teaching projects: RAPD Analysis and SCAR design in the TCM complex Clematis Armandii Caulis (chuān mù tōng), F2 Plant Evolution, 2011 Effects of highly fragmented DNA on PCR, F3, Lidija Krebs, 2012 1 I. Acknowledgement “Nothing is permanent except change” Heraclitus of Ephesus Entering adolescence – approximately 24 years ago – many aspects of life pretty much escaped my understanding. After a period of turmoil and subsequent experience of a life as laborer lacking an education, I realized that I did not want to settle for this kind of life. I wanted to change. With this work I would like to thank all people that ever bothered trying to explain the world to me, that allowed me to find my way and nurtured my desire to change.
    [Show full text]
  • Cytogeography of Glechoma Hederacea Subsp. Grandis (Labiatae) in Japan
    © 2010 The Japan Mendel Society Cytologia 75(3): 255–260, 2010 Cytogeography of Glechoma hederacea subsp. grandis (Labiatae) in Japan Norihito Miura and Yoshikane Iwatsubo* Graduate School of Science and Engineering, University of Toyama, Gofuku 3190, Toyama 930–8555, Japan Received February 26, 2010; accepted August 28, 2010 Summary In this study, we examined the chromosomal number for Glechoma hederacea subsp. grandis in a total of 1,030 specimens collected from different distribution areas in Japan. We found that G. hederacea subsp. grandis could be categorized into 3 cytotypes with 2nϭ36 (tetraploid), 2nϭ45 (pentaploid) and 2nϭ54 (hexaploid) chromosomes. Tetraploid plants were found throughout different areas in Japan; however, hexaploid plants were mainly distributed in central Honshu, Shikoku and Kyushu. Likewise, pentaploid plant distribution was found to overlap with hexaploid plant distribution areas. The pentaploid plant group appeared only in regions common to both tetraploid and hexaploid plants. All 3 cytotypes were found to have karyotypes which could be represented by the following equations: A) 6Mϩ4mϩ18smϩ8st for tetraploids, B) 6Mϩ15mϩ19smϩ5st for pentaploids, and C) 6Mϩ26mϩ20smϩ2st for hexaploids. Pentaploid specimen karyotypes had half the tetraploid and half the hexaploid chromosomal set, indicating that this specimen was a hybrid between tetraploid and hexaploid plants. Key words Geographic distribution, Glechoma hederacea subsp. grandis, Hybrid, Karyotype, Polyploidy. Glechoma L. (Labiatae), distributed across north temperate zones in Eurasia, is a small genus with 4 to 8 species (Budantsev 2004). One of its species, G. hederacea L., has a wide distribution range occurring spontaneously throughout Eurasia. Furthermore, this species can be divided into subsp. hederacea distributed in Europe, and subsp.
    [Show full text]
  • Overview Regarding the Bioactivity of Agastache Foeniculum and Nepeta Cataria Species
    Overview Regarding the Bioactivity of Agastache foeniculum and Nepeta cataria Species * Simona DUDA, Liviu Al. MĂRGHITAŞ, Dan DEZMIREAN, Otilia BOBIŞ Department of Technological Sciences,[email protected] Faculty of Animal Science and Biotechnologies, University of Agricultural Sciences and Veterinary Medicine Cluj-Napoca, Romania *Corresponding author, email: Bulletin UASVM Animal Science and Biotechnologies 72(1) / 2015 Print ISSN 1843-5262; Electronic ISSN 1843-536X DOI:10.15835/buasvmcn-asb:10591 Abstract Agastache foeniculum Nepeta cataria In this study, we summarize the recent advances on chemical compositionet al., and bioactivity of giant hyssop ( et al., (Pursh) Kuntze) and catnip ( L.). Extracts from giant hyssop and catnip have a significant bioactivity, antibacterial and antioxidant activity (Suschke 2007; Zielińska and Matkowski, 2014; Mihaylova 2013). This literature review wants to emphasize the value of these two plants and the opportunity of using them to obtain bioactive extracts with applicability in beekeeping for different pest control. Different parts of the mentioned plants were used for the determination of active principles from macerates and essential oils. Spectrophotometric methods as well as high performance liquid chromatography and gasAgastache chromatography foeniculum are as generally used for determination of bioactive principles from theTribolium classes ofcastaneum polyphenols, flavonoids, carotenoids andRhyzopertha aromatic acids.dominica Remarkable results have been obtained Ephestia using kuehniella the essential oil from Plodia interpunctellaan insecticide for the control of pests like the Red flour beetle ( Herbst), Lesser grainNepeta borer cataria( F.), Mediterranean flour mothStaphylococcus( aureus) Klebsiellaand t h e pneumoniaeIndian meal Pseudomonasmoth ( aeruginosa, Escherichia) from the coligrain and and Bacillus food warehouses subtillis (Ebadollahi,et al., 2011). The anti-microbial activity of catnip ( ) was proven in over five bacterial strains: , , (Bandh 2011).
    [Show full text]
  • Conserving Europe's Threatened Plants
    Conserving Europe’s threatened plants Progress towards Target 8 of the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation Conserving Europe’s threatened plants Progress towards Target 8 of the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation By Suzanne Sharrock and Meirion Jones May 2009 Recommended citation: Sharrock, S. and Jones, M., 2009. Conserving Europe’s threatened plants: Progress towards Target 8 of the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation Botanic Gardens Conservation International, Richmond, UK ISBN 978-1-905164-30-1 Published by Botanic Gardens Conservation International Descanso House, 199 Kew Road, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 3BW, UK Design: John Morgan, [email protected] Acknowledgements The work of establishing a consolidated list of threatened Photo credits European plants was first initiated by Hugh Synge who developed the original database on which this report is based. All images are credited to BGCI with the exceptions of: We are most grateful to Hugh for providing this database to page 5, Nikos Krigas; page 8. Christophe Libert; page 10, BGCI and advising on further development of the list. The Pawel Kos; page 12 (upper), Nikos Krigas; page 14: James exacting task of inputting data from national Red Lists was Hitchmough; page 16 (lower), Jože Bavcon; page 17 (upper), carried out by Chris Cockel and without his dedicated work, the Nkos Krigas; page 20 (upper), Anca Sarbu; page 21, Nikos list would not have been completed. Thank you for your efforts Krigas; page 22 (upper) Simon Williams; page 22 (lower), RBG Chris. We are grateful to all the members of the European Kew; page 23 (upper), Jo Packet; page 23 (lower), Sandrine Botanic Gardens Consortium and other colleagues from Europe Godefroid; page 24 (upper) Jože Bavcon; page 24 (lower), Frank who provided essential advice, guidance and supplementary Scumacher; page 25 (upper) Michael Burkart; page 25, (lower) information on the species included in the database.
    [Show full text]
  • Staminal Evolution in the Genus Salvia (Lamiaceae): Molecular Phylogenetic Evidence for Multiple Origins of the Staminal Lever
    Staminal Evolution In The Genus Salvia (Lamiaceae): Molecular Phylogenetic Evidence For Multiple Origins Of The Staminal Lever Jay B. Walker & Kenneth J. Sytsma (Dept. of Botany, University of Wisconsin, Madison) Annals of Botany (in press) Abstract • Background and Aims - The genus Salvia has traditionally included any member of the tribe Mentheae (Lamiaceae) with only two stamens and with each stamen expressing an elongate connective. The recent demonstration of the non-monophyly of the genus presents interesting implications for staminal evolution in the tribe Mentheae. In the context of a molecular phylogeny, we characterize the staminal morphology of the various lineages of Salvia and related genera and present an evolutionary interpretation of staminal variation within the tribe Mentheae. • Methods. Two molecular analyses are presented in order to investigate phylogenetic relationships in the tribe Mentheae and the genus Salvia. The first presents a tribal survey of the Mentheae and the second concentrates on Salvia and related genera. Schematic sketches are presented for the staminal morphology of each major lineage of Salvia and related genera. • Key Results. These analyses suggest an independent origin of the staminal elongate connective on at least three different occasions within the tribe Mentheae, each time with a distinct morphology. Each independent origin of the lever mechanism shows a similar progression of staminal change from slight elongation of the connective tissue separating two fertile thecae to abortion of the posterior thecae and fusion of adjacent posterior thecae. We characterize a monophyletic lineage within the Mentheae consisting of the genera Lepechinia, Melissa, Salvia, Dorystaechas, Meriandra, Zhumeria, Perovskia, and Rosmarinus. • Conclusions.
    [Show full text]
  • Palynological Evolutionary Trends Within the Tribe Mentheae with Special Emphasis on Subtribe Menthinae (Nepetoideae: Lamiaceae)
    Plant Syst Evol (2008) 275:93–108 DOI 10.1007/s00606-008-0042-y ORIGINAL ARTICLE Palynological evolutionary trends within the tribe Mentheae with special emphasis on subtribe Menthinae (Nepetoideae: Lamiaceae) Hye-Kyoung Moon Æ Stefan Vinckier Æ Erik Smets Æ Suzy Huysmans Received: 13 December 2007 / Accepted: 28 March 2008 / Published online: 10 September 2008 Ó Springer-Verlag 2008 Abstract The pollen morphology of subtribe Menthinae Keywords Bireticulum Á Mentheae Á Menthinae Á sensu Harley et al. [In: The families and genera of vascular Nepetoideae Á Palynology Á Phylogeny Á plants VII. Flowering plantsÁdicotyledons: Lamiales (except Exine ornamentation Acanthaceae including Avicenniaceae). Springer, Berlin, pp 167–275, 2004] and two genera of uncertain subtribal affinities (Heterolamium and Melissa) are documented in Introduction order to complete our palynological overview of the tribe Mentheae. Menthinae pollen is small to medium in size The pollen morphology of Lamiaceae has proven to be (13–43 lm), oblate to prolate in shape and mostly hexacol- systematically valuable since Erdtman (1945) used the pate (sometimes pentacolpate). Perforate, microreticulate or number of nuclei and the aperture number to divide the bireticulate exine ornamentation types were observed. The family into two subfamilies (i.e. Lamioideae: bi-nucleate exine ornamentation of Menthinae is systematically highly and tricolpate pollen, Nepetoideae: tri-nucleate and hexa- informative particularly at generic level. The exine stratifi- colpate pollen). While the
    [Show full text]
  • New Orleans Botanical Garden Plant Sale Saturday September 14, 2013 Pelican Greenhouse 9-12
    New Orleans Botanical Garden Plant Sale Saturday September 14, 2013 Pelican Greenhouse 9-12 Fence Row Plectranthus Mona Lavender Greenhouse Row Split Leaf Philodendron Philodendron bipinnatifidum Crepe Ginger Costus speciosus Chinese Rain Bells Strobilanthes hamiltoniana Velvet Stepladder Ginger Costus malortieanus Dwarf Elephant Ear Colocasia fallax ‘Silver Dollar’ Costus erythrophyllus Imperial Taro Colocasia antiquorum ‘Illustris’ Costus ‘Green Mountain’ Angel Trumpet Brugmansia ‘Charles Grimaldi’ Orange Tulip Ginger Costus curvibracteatus Little White Soldiers Drimiopsis maculata Turmeric Costus longa Dorstenia contrajerva Curcuma hybrid ‘Choco Zebra Red’ Dusty Thalia Thalia dealbata Curcuma ‘Ribbon’ Chinese Taro Alocasia cucullata Curcuma ‘Purple Garden’ Indigo Indigofera decora Curcuma ‘Emperor’ Valerian Valerian officinalis Yellow Dancing Girl Globba schomburgkii Variegated Peppermint Scented Geranium Strap-leaf Ginger Stahlianthes involucratus Pseuderanthemum ‘Texas Tri-Star’ Purple Globe Ginger Globba globulifera Cocoa Plant Theobroma cacao Cat Palm Chamaedorea cataractarum Oyster Plant Tradescantia spathacea Assorted Ti Plants Red Buckeye Aesculus pavia Basket Plant Callisia fragrans Dianthera Dianthera nodosa ‘Pretty in Pink’ Asian Crocus Kaempferia rotunda Cuban Oregano Plectranthus amboinicus Aspidistra Milky Way Aspidistra elatior ‘Milky Way’ Southern Swamp Lily Crinum americanum Perilla ‘Magilla’ Bush Willow Salix integra ‘Hakuro Nishiki’ Mickey Mouse Taro Xanthosoma atrovirens Indigo Spires Sage Salvia ‘Indigo Spires’
    [Show full text]
  • NVEO 2017, Volume 4, Issue 4, Pages 14-27
    Nat. Volatiles & Essent. Oils, 2017: 4(4): 14-27 Celep & Dirmenci REVIEW Systematic and Biogeographic overview of Lamiaceae in Turkey Ferhat Celep1,* and Tuncay Dirmenci2 1 Mehmet Akif Ersoy mah. 269. cad. Urankent Prestij Konutları, C16 Blok, No: 53, Demetevler, Ankara, TURKEY 2 Biology Education, Necatibey Education Faculty, Balıkesir University, Balıkesir, TURKEY *Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected] Abstract Lamiaceae is the third largest family based on the taxon number and fourth largest family based on the species number in Turkey. The family has 48 genera and 782 taxa (603 species, 179 subspecies and varieties), 346 taxa (271 species, 75 subspecies and varieties) of which are endemic (ca. 44%) (data updated 1th February 2017) in the country. There are also 23 hybrid species, 19 of which are endemic (82%). The results proven that Turkey is one of the centers of diversity for Lamiaceae in the Old World. In addition, Turkey has about 10% of all Lamiaceae members in the World. The largest five genera in the country based on the taxon number are Stachys (118 taxa), Salvia (107 taxa), Sideritis (54 taxa), Phlomis (53 taxa) and Teucrium (49 taxa). According to taxon number, five genera with the highest endemism ratio are Dorystaechas (1 taxon, 100%), Lophantus (1 taxon, 100%), Sideritis (54 taxa, 74%), Drymosiphon (9 taxa, 67%), and Marrubium (27 taxa, 63%). There are two monotypic genera in Turkey as Dorystaechas and Pentapleura. Turkey sits on the junction of three phytogeographic regions with highly diverse climate and the other ecologic features. Phytogeographic distribution of Turkish Lamiaceae taxa are 293 taxa in the Mediterranean (37.4%), 267 taxa in the Irano-Turanian (36.7%), 90 taxa in the Euro-Siberian (Circumboreal) phytogeographic region, and 112 taxa in Unknown or Multiregional (14.3%) phytogeographical elements.
    [Show full text]
  • Floerkea Proserpinacoides Willdenow False Mermaid-Weed
    New England Plant Conservation Program Floerkea proserpinacoides Willdenow False Mermaid-weed Conservation and Research Plan for New England Prepared by: William H. Moorhead III Consulting Botanist Litchfield, Connecticut and Elizabeth J. Farnsworth Senior Research Ecologist New England Wild Flower Society Framingham, Massachusetts For: New England Wild Flower Society 180 Hemenway Road Framingham, MA 01701 508/877-7630 e-mail: [email protected] • website: www.newfs.org Approved, Regional Advisory Council, December 2003 1 SUMMARY Floerkea proserpinacoides Willdenow, false mermaid-weed, is an herbaceous annual and the only member of the Limnanthaceae in New England. The species has a disjunct but widespread range throughout North America, with eastern and western segregates separated by the Great Plains. In the east, it ranges from Nova Scotia south to Louisiana and west to Minnesota and Missouri. In the west, it ranges from British Columbia to California, east to Utah and Colorado. Although regarded as Globally Secure (G5), national ranks of N? in Canada and the United States indicate some uncertainly about its true conservation status in North America. It is listed as rare (S1 or S2) in 20% of the states and provinces in which it occurs. Floerkea is known from only 11 sites total in New England: three historic sites in Vermont (where it is ranked SH), one historic population in Massachusetts (where it is ranked SX), and four extant and three historic localities in Connecticut (where it is ranked S1, Endangered). The Flora Conservanda: New England ranks it as a Division 2 (Regionally Rare) taxon. Floerkea inhabits open or forested floodplains, riverside seeps, and limestone cliffs in New England, and more generally moist alluvial soils, mesic forests, springy woods, and streamside meadows throughout its range.
    [Show full text]
  • The Vascular Flora of Rarău Massif (Eastern Carpathians, Romania). Note Ii
    Memoirs of the Scientific Sections of the Romanian Academy Tome XXXVI, 2013 BIOLOGY THE VASCULAR FLORA OF RARĂU MASSIF (EASTERN CARPATHIANS, ROMANIA). NOTE II ADRIAN OPREA1 and CULIŢĂ SÎRBU2 1 “Anastasie Fătu” Botanical Garden, Str. Dumbrava Roşie, nr. 7-9, 700522–Iaşi, Romania 2 University of Agricultural Sciences and Veterinary Medicine Iaşi, Faculty of Agriculture, Str. Mihail Sadoveanu, nr. 3, 700490–Iaşi, Romania Corresponding author: [email protected] This second part of the paper about the vascular flora of Rarău Massif listed approximately half of the whole number of the species registered by the authors in their field trips or already included in literature on the same area. Other taxa have been added to the initial list of plants, so that, the total number of taxa registered by the authors in Rarău Massif amount to 1443 taxa (1133 species and 310 subspecies, varieties and forms). There was signaled out the alien taxa on the surveyed area (18 species) and those dubious presence of some taxa for the same area (17 species). Also, there were listed all the vascular plants, protected by various laws or regulations, both internal or international, existing in Rarău (i.e. 189 taxa). Finally, there has been assessed the degree of wild flora conservation, using several indicators introduced in literature by Nowak, as they are: conservation indicator (C), threat conservation indicator) (CK), sozophytisation indicator (W), and conservation effectiveness indicator (E). Key words: Vascular flora, Rarău Massif, Romania, conservation indicators. 1. INTRODUCTION A comprehensive analysis of Rarău flora, in terms of plant diversity, taxonomic structure, biological, ecological and phytogeographic characteristics, as well as in terms of the richness in endemics, relict or threatened plant species was published in our previous note (see Oprea & Sîrbu 2012).
    [Show full text]