Community Sequencing Program: Project Proposal
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Egg-Mimics of Streptanthus (Cruciferae) Deter Oviposition by Pieris Sisymbrii (Lepidoptera: Pieridae)
Oecologia (Berl) (1981) 48:142-143 Oecologia Springer-Verlag 198l Short Communication Egg-Mimics of Streptanthus (Cruciferae) Deter Oviposition by Pieris sisymbrii (Lepidoptera: Pieridae) Arthur M. Shapiro Department of Zoology, University of California, Davis, CA 95616, USA Summary. Streptanthus breweri, a serpentine-soil annual mus- appear to decrease the attractiveness of mature S. glandulosus tard, produces pigmented callosities on its upper leaves which to ovipositing females (Shapiro, in press). are thought to mimic the eggs of the Pierid butterfly Pieris The efficacy of the suspected egg-mimics of S. breweri was sisymbrii. P. sisymbrii is one of several inflorescence - infructes- tested afield at Turtle Rock, Napa County, California (North cence-feeding Pierids which assess egg load visually on individual Coast Ranges). The site is an almost unvegetated, steep serpen- host plants prior to ovipositing. Removal of the "egg-mimics" tine talus slope with a S to SW exposure. S. breweri is the domi- from S. breweri plants in situ significantly increases the probabili- nant Crucifer (S. glandulosus also occurs) and P. sisymbrii the ty of an oviposition relative to similar, intact plants. dominant Pierid (Anthocharis sara Lucas and Euchloe hyantis Edw., both Euchloines, are present). On 10 April 1980 I prepared two lists of 50 numbers from a random numbers table. On 11 April, 100 plants of S. breweri "Egg-load assessment" occurs when a female insect's choice in the appropriate phenophase (elongating/budding, bearing egg- to oviposit or not on a given substrate is influenced by whether mimics) were numbered and tagged. Each was measured, its or not eggs (con or heterospecific) are present. -
Macroevolutionary Patterns of Glucosinolate Defense and Tests of Defense-Escalation and Resource Availability Hypotheses
Research Macroevolutionary patterns of glucosinolate defense and tests of defense-escalation and resource availability hypotheses N. Ivalu Cacho1,2, Daniel J. Kliebenstein3,4 and Sharon Y. Strauss1 1Center for Population Biology, and Department of Evolution of Ecology, University of California, One Shields Avenue, Davis, CA 95616, USA; 2Instituto de Biologıa, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, Circuito Exterior, Ciudad Universitaria, 04510 Mexico City, Mexico; 3Department of Plant Sciences, University of California. One Shields Avenue, Davis, CA 95616, USA; 4DynaMo Center of Excellence, University of Copenhagen, Thorvaldsensvej 40, DK-1871 Frederiksberg C, Denmark Summary Author for correspondence: We explored macroevolutionary patterns of plant chemical defense in Streptanthus (Brassi- N. Ivalu Cacho caceae), tested for evolutionary escalation of defense, as predicted by Ehrlich and Raven’s Tel: +1 530 304 5391 plant–herbivore coevolutionary arms-race hypothesis, and tested whether species inhabiting Email: [email protected] low-resource or harsh environments invest more in defense, as predicted by the resource Received: 13 April 2015 availability hypothesis (RAH). Accepted: 8 June 2015 We conducted phylogenetically explicit analyses using glucosinolate profiles, soil nutrient analyses, and microhabitat bareness estimates across 30 species of Streptanthus inhabiting New Phytologist (2015) 208: 915–927 varied environments and soils. doi: 10.1111/nph.13561 We found weak to moderate phylogenetic signal in glucosinolate classes -
International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants
E TG/NASTU(proj.3) ORIGINAL: English DATE: 2018-08-03 INTERNATIONAL UNION FOR THE PROTECTION OF NEW VARIETIES OF PLANTS Geneva DRAFT * WATERCRESS UPOV Code(s): NASTU_MIC; NASTU_OFF; NASTU_STE Nasturtium microphyllum Boenn. ex Rchb.; Nasturtium officinale R. Br.; Nasturtium xsterile (Airy Shaw) Oefelein GUIDELINES FOR THE CONDUCT OF TESTS FOR DISTINCTNESS, UNIFORMITY AND STABILITY prepared by experts from United Kingdom to be considered by the Technical Working Party for Vegetables at its fifty-second session, to be held in Beijing, China, from 2018-09-17 to 2018-09-21 Disclaimer: this document does not represent UPOV policies or guidance Alternative names:* Botanical name English French German Spanish Nasturtium microphyllum One-row watercress Boenn. ex Rchb. Nasturtium officinale R. Br., Watercress cresson de fontaine; Brunnenkresse berro Rorippa nasturtium-aquaticum cresson d'eau (L.) Hayek Nasturtium xsterile (Airy Shaw) Oefelein, Nasturtium microphyllum x Nasturtium officinale, Rorippa microphylla x Rorippa nasturtium- aquaticum The purpose of these guidelines (“Test Guidelines”) is to elaborate the principles contained in the General Introduction (document TG/1/3), and its associated TGP documents, into detailed practical guidance for the harmonized examination of distinctness, uniformity and stability (DUS) and, in particular, to identify appropriate characteristics for the examination of DUS and production of harmonized variety descriptions. ASSOCIATED DOCUMENTS These Test Guidelines should be read in conjunction with the General Introduction and its associated TGP documents. * These names were correct at the time of the introduction of these Test Guidelines but may be revised or updated. [Readers are advised to consult the UPOV Code, which can be found on the UPOV Website (www.upov.int), for the latest information.] TG/NASTU(proj.3) Watercress, 2018-08-03 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE 1. -
(Cruciferae) – Mustard Family
BRASSICACEAE (CRUCIFERAE) – MUSTARD FAMILY Plant: herbs mostly, annual to perennial, sometimes shrubs; sap sometimes peppery Stem: Root: Leaves: mostly simple but sometimes pinnately divided; alternate, rarely opposite or whorled; no stipules Flowers: mostly perfect, mostly regular (actinomorphic); 4 sepals, 4 petals often forming a cross; 6 stamens with usually 2 outer ones shorter than the inner 4; ovary superior, mostly 2 fused carpels, 1 to many ovules, 1 pistil Fruit: seed pods, often used in classification, many are slender and long (Silique), some broad (Silicle) – see morphology slide Other: a large family, many garden plants such as turnip, radish, and cabbage, also some spices; often termed the Cruciferae family; Dicotyledons Group Genera: 350+ genera; 40+ locally WARNING – family descriptions are only a layman’s guide and should not be used as definitive Flower Morphology in the Brassicaceae (Mustard Family) - flower with 4 sepals, 4 petals (often like a cross, sometimes split or lobed), commonly small, often white or yellow, distinctive fruiting structures often important for ID 2 types of fruiting pods: in addition, fruits may be circular, flattened or angled in cross-section Silicle - (usually <2.5x long as wide), 2-valved with septum (replum) Silique - (usually >2.5x long as wide), 2- valved with septum (replum) Flowers, Many Genera BRASSICACEAE (CRUCIFERAE) – MUSTARD FAMILY Sanddune [Western] Wallflower; Erysimum capitatum (Douglas ex Hook.) Greene var. capitatum Wormseed Wallflower [Mustard]; Erysimum cheiranthoides L. (Introduced) Spreading Wallflower [Treacle Mustard]; Erysimum repandum L. (Introduced) Dame’s Rocket [Dame’s Violet]; Hesperis matronalis L. (Introduced) Purple [Violet] Rocket; Iodanthus pinnatifidus (Michx.) Steud. Michaux's Gladecress; Leavenworthia uniflora (Michx.) Britton [Cow; Field] Cress [Peppergrass]; Lepidium campestre L.) Ait. -
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, -
Conservation Strategy for Tahoe Yellow Cress
CONSERVATION STRATEGY FOR TAHOE YELLOW CRESS (Rorippa subumbellata) August 2002 CONSERVATION STRATEGY FOR TAHOE YELLOW CRESS (Rorippa subumbellata) Developed by: Bruce Pavlik, Ph.D. Dennis Murphy, Ph.D. and the Tahoe Yellow Cress Technical Advisory Group August 2002 Citation: Pavlik, B. et al. 2002. Conservation Strategy for Tahoe Yellow Cress (Rorippa subumbellata). Tahoe Regional Planning Agency. Lake Tahoe, NV Table of Contents Conservation Strategy TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .........................................................................EX-1 I. INTRODUCTION A. BACKGROUND ...............................................................................1 B. HISTORY OF SPECIES CONSERVATION ...........................................5 II. CONSERVATION STRATEGY A. TAHOE YELLOW CRESS AND LAKE TAHOE. ..................................8 B. BIOLOGICAL OVERVIEW OF TAHOE YELLOW CRESS .....................13 C. CONCEPTUAL MODEL OF METAPOPULATION DYNAMICS ............27 D. ANALYSIS OF EXISTING DATA........................................................38 E. CONSERVATION ON PUBLIC AND PRIVATE LANDS........................62 F. CONSERVATION GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND ASSOCIATED ACTIONS ........................................................................................65 G. DESCRIPTION OF MANAGEMENT ACTIONS ...................................73 H. ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK .......................................84 I. IMMINENT EXTINCTION CONTINGENCY PLAN.............................89 J. STEWARDSHIP, EDUCATION, AND OUTREACH -
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 -
Taxa Named in Honor of Ihsan A. Al-Shehbaz
TAXA NAMED IN HONOR OF IHSAN A. AL-SHEHBAZ 1. Tribe Shehbazieae D. A. German, Turczaninowia 17(4): 22. 2014. 2. Shehbazia D. A. German, Turczaninowia 17(4): 20. 2014. 3. Shehbazia tibetica (Maxim.) D. A. German, Turczaninowia 17(4): 20. 2014. 4. Astragalus shehbazii Zarre & Podlech, Feddes Repert. 116: 70. 2005. 5. Bornmuellerantha alshehbaziana Dönmez & Mutlu, Novon 20: 265. 2010. 6. Centaurea shahbazii Ranjbar & Negaresh, Edinb. J. Bot. 71: 1. 2014. 7. Draba alshehbazii Klimeš & D. A. German, Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 158: 750. 2008. 8. Ferula shehbaziana S. A. Ahmad, Harvard Pap. Bot. 18: 99. 2013. 9. Matthiola shehbazii Ranjbar & Karami, Nordic J. Bot. doi: 10.1111/j.1756-1051.2013.00326.x, 10. Plocama alshehbazii F. O. Khass., D. Khamr., U. Khuzh. & Achilova, Stapfia 101: 25. 2014. 11. Alshehbazia Salariato & Zuloaga, Kew Bulletin …….. 2015 12. Alshehbzia hauthalii (Gilg & Muschl.) Salariato & Zuloaga 13. Ihsanalshehbazia Tahir Ali & Thines, Taxon 65: 93. 2016. 14. Ihsanalshehbazia granatensis (Boiss. & Reuter) Tahir Ali & Thines, Taxon 65. 93. 2016. 15. Aubrieta alshehbazii Dönmez, Uǧurlu & M.A.Koch, Phytotaxa 299. 104. 2017. 16. Silene shehbazii S.A.Ahmad, Novon 25: 131. 2017. PUBLICATIONS OF IHSAN A. AL-SHEHBAZ 1973 1. Al-Shehbaz, I. A. 1973. The biosystematics of the genus Thelypodium (Cruciferae). Contrib. Gray Herb. 204: 3-148. 1977 2. Al-Shehbaz, I. A. 1977. Protogyny, Cruciferae. Syst. Bot. 2: 327-333. 3. A. R. Al-Mayah & I. A. Al-Shehbaz. 1977. Chromosome numbers for some Leguminosae from Iraq. Bot. Notiser 130: 437-440. 1978 4. Al-Shehbaz, I. A. 1978. Chromosome number reports, certain Cruciferae from Iraq. -
Brassicaceae) in Turkey
Bangladesh J. Bot. 46(2): 623-629, 2017 (June) POLLEN MORPHOLOGY OF SIX SPECIES PREVIOUSLY PLACED IN MALCOLMIA (BRASSICACEAE) IN TURKEY * 1 2 3 AYLA KAYA , MURAT ÜNAL , FEVZİ ÖZGÖKÇE , BEKİR DOĞAN 4 AND ESRA MARTİN Department of Pharmaceutical Botany, Faculty of Pharmacy, Anadolu University, TR-26470 Eskisehir, Turkey. Keywords: Pollen morphology, Malcolmia, Strigosella, Zuvanda, Turkey Abstract The genus Malcolmia R. Br. (Brassicaceae) is taxonomically problematic and some of its species have recently been transferred to the genera Strigosella Boiss. and Zuvanda Dvorak. In this study, pollen morphology of some species of Malcolmia, Strigosella and Zuvanda, previously placed in Malcolmia genus, were examined under scanning electron microscope (SEM), in order to determine the significance of pollen features as taxonomic characters. The results reveal rather uniform morphological features, however fine details are characteristic to distinguishing pollen grains in the species of the genus. The pollen grains in three genera are tricolpate and the surface sculpturing type is reticulate. The basic shape of the pollen grains in species studied is euprolate, subprolate-euprolate and euprolate-perprolate. While pollen grains of S. africana is the smallest in all examined species, M. chia is the biggest. However, three genera can be easily separated by the length of the polar and equatorial axes themselves. Introduction The genus Malcolmia R.Br. is a member of Brassicaceae and it comprises ten species distributed throughout the world (Al-Shehbaz et al. 2006). Malcolmia was previously represented by six species in Turkey (Cullen 1965). In recent studies, two more species belonging to Malcolmia genus have added to the flora of Turkey as new records. -
Morphologically and Physiologically Diverse Fruits of Two Lepidium
bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2019.12.23.887026; this version posted December 23, 2019. 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 4.0 International license. 1 Morphologically and physiologically diverse fruits of two Lepidium species differ 2 in allocation of glucosinolates into immature and mature seed and pericarp 3 4 Said Mohammed1,#a¶, Samik Bhattacharya1¶*, Matthias A. Gesing2¶, Katharina Klupsch3, 5 Günter Theißen3, Klaus Mummenhoff1&, Caroline Müller2& 6 1 Department of Biology, Botany, University of Osnabrück, Barbarastraße 11, D-49076 7 Osnabrück, Germany 8 2 Faculty of Biology, Department of Chemical Ecology, Bielefeld University, 9 Universitätsstraße 25, D-33615 Bielefeld, Germany 10 3 Matthias Schleiden Institute / Genetics, Friedrich Schiller University Jena, 11 Philosophenweg 12, 07743, Jena, Germany 12 #a Current address: Department of Biology, Debre Birhan University, Ethiopia 13 14 * Corresponding author 15 E-mail: [email protected] (SB) 16 17 ¶These authors contributed equally to this work. 18 19 Short title: Glucosinolate allocation in Lepidium seed and pericarp 1 bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2019.12.23.887026; this version posted December 23, 2019. 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 4.0 International license. 20 Abstract 21 The morphology and physiology of diaspores play crucial roles in determining the fate of 22 seeds in unpredictable habitats. -
Fort Ord Natural Reserve Plant List
UCSC Fort Ord Natural Reserve Plants Below is the most recently updated plant list for UCSC Fort Ord Natural Reserve. * non-native taxon ? presence in question Listed Species Information: CNPS Listed - as designated by the California Rare Plant Ranks (formerly known as CNPS Lists). More information at http://www.cnps.org/cnps/rareplants/ranking.php Cal IPC Listed - an inventory that categorizes exotic and invasive plants as High, Moderate, or Limited, reflecting the level of each species' negative ecological impact in California. More information at http://www.cal-ipc.org More information about Federal and State threatened and endangered species listings can be found at https://www.fws.gov/endangered/ (US) and http://www.dfg.ca.gov/wildlife/nongame/ t_e_spp/ (CA). FAMILY NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME LISTED Ferns AZOLLACEAE - Mosquito Fern American water fern, mosquito fern, Family Azolla filiculoides ? Mosquito fern, Pacific mosquitofern DENNSTAEDTIACEAE - Bracken Hairy brackenfern, Western bracken Family Pteridium aquilinum var. pubescens fern DRYOPTERIDACEAE - Shield or California wood fern, Coastal wood wood fern family Dryopteris arguta fern, Shield fern Common horsetail rush, Common horsetail, field horsetail, Field EQUISETACEAE - Horsetail Family Equisetum arvense horsetail Equisetum telmateia ssp. braunii Giant horse tail, Giant horsetail Pentagramma triangularis ssp. PTERIDACEAE - Brake Family triangularis Gold back fern Gymnosperms CUPRESSACEAE - Cypress Family Hesperocyparis macrocarpa Monterey cypress CNPS - 1B.2, Cal IPC -
The Evolutionary Dynamics of Genes and Genomes: Copy Number Variation of the Chalcone Synthase Gene in the Context of Brassicaceae Evolution
The Evolutionary Dynamics of Genes and Genomes: Copy Number Variation of the Chalcone Synthase Gene in the Context of Brassicaceae Evolution Dissertation submitted to the Combined Faculties for Natural Sciences and for Mathematics of the Ruperto-Carola University of Heidelberg, Germany for the degree of Doctor of Natural Sciences presented by Liza Paola Ding born in Mosbach, Baden-Württemberg, Germany Oral examination: 22.12.2014 Referees: Prof. Dr. Marcus A. Koch Prof. Dr. Claudia Erbar Table of contents INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 18 1 THE MUSTARD FAMILY ....................................................................................... 19 2 THE TRIBAL SYSTEM OF THE BRASSICACEAE ........................................... 22 3 CHALCONE SYNTHASE ........................................................................................ 23 PART 1: TROUBLE WITH THE OUTGROUP............................................................ 27 4 MATERIAL AND METHODS ................................................................................. 28 4.1 Experimental set-up ......................................................................................................................... 28 4.1.1 Plant material and data composition .............................................................................................. 28 4.1.2 DNA extraction and PCR amplification ........................................................................................