DOCSLIB.ORG

Indicis Nominum Familiarum Angiospermarum Prodromus A

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Indicis Nominum Familiarum Angiospermarum Prodromus A JAN.-FEBR. 1958 VOL. VII No. 1 n'9s TAXON OfficialNews Bulletinof theInternational Association for Plant Taxonomy, Edited and Published for I.A P.T. bythe International Bureau for Plant Taxonomy and Nomenclature, 106 Lange Nieuwstraat, Utrecht, Netherlands INDICIS NOMINUM FAMILIARUM ANGIOSPERMARUM PRODROMUS A. A. Bullock (Kew) It has long been known that many of the more commonly used names of plant Families are illegitimate. The bibliographic research required to establish dates of valid publication, as well as legitimacy, however, has seemed scarcely worth while. Some of the difficulties were pointed out by Sprague (Journ. Bot. 60: 69-73) as long ago as 1922, when he clarified the position in regard to a few difficult cases. In 1900 Kuntze and Post (Allg. Bot. Zeitschr. 1900: 110) gave a list of family names which they had corrected according to the Paris Codex of 1867, but their corrections do not always apply under the Paris Code of 1954, and their work was limited also by acceptance taxonomically of the families included in the Pflanzenfamilien and nomenclaturally of the so-called family names used by Adanson and others prior to the Genera Plantarum of Jussieu (1789). In order to obtain uniformity and stability Sprague and Lanjouw proposed to the Amsterdam.Congress (1935) that all the family names appearing (with approxi- mately the same circumscription) in both the Pflanzenjamilien and in Bentham and Hooker's Genera Plantarum, should be preserved by conservation. The list included 185 names, plus Papilionaceae which, it was proposed, should be a legitimate name if Leguminosae is divided into groups of family rank. The places and dates of valid publication were not given, but the list was published in Sprague's Synopsis of Proposals . ... Amsterdam 1935. Further names were submitted to the Stockholm (1950) Congress by Camp, Little and Wheeler (Lanjouw, Syn. Prop. .... Stockholm 1950, pp. 218--221) and the full list was printed as Appendix 5A in the International Code of 1952, as a list of Nomina Familiarum Conservanda [Proposita]. At the Paris Congress (1954), however, there was some opposition to the accept- ance of the list and the Editorial Committee was expressly forbidden to reprint it in the proposed new edition of the Code. The result is that one is left with the irregularly formed family names Palmae, Gramineae, Cruciferae, Leguminosae, Guttiferae, Umbelliferae, Labiatae and Compositae (with Papilionaceae as a make- weight) as the only conserved family names; these also have the added distinction of being the only groups which may bear two legitimate names. The alternative names, clearly proposed in the Sprague and Lanjouw list, are subject to deter- mination by application of the remaining rules of the Code. The present list is the result of an attempt to find all the validly published family names. The first difficulty was to decide whether the provisions of Art. 5 could be strictly applied for this purpose. It quickly became evident that they could not. but 1 This content downloaded from 69.74.186.251 on Sun, 23 Feb 2014 13:59:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Art. 5 may be interpreted very broadly. "Relative order" of categories has nothing to do with the terms denoting the categories and so long as the position in the hierarchy is maintained I have accepted "family", "order", "natural order" as synonymous. Indeed, some authors used all these terms indiscriminately for the same group; the strict modern use of the term "family" is of comparatively recent date. 1 It became evident also that the Code, supposedly applying to all taxa up to the rank of order, has been made and modified mainly to apply to names of genera and taxa below that rank. Many names in the list are proposed for conservation; the corresponding rejected names are noted in the same entry and they are also separately listed. There are remarkably few homonyms. Some explanation of the methods used is called for, since they are somewhat arbitrary and I have tended to treat each name on its own merits rather than by applying a set of rules. I found that 1753 was an impossible commencing date and the difficulties of interpretation2 at this early period convinced me that Jussieu's Genera Plantarum (1789) is the earliest work in which modern families became recognisable. This, I propose, should be the work from which family nomenclature begins. Typification has been carried out by the application of Article 18 in reverse. That Article provides for the formation of a new family name from the stem of the name of its type genus, but it is abundantly clear that the older authors did not by any means do this and the imposition of a "type-method" and modern rules on to a system where neither was actually applied leads often to a ludicrous position. For example, Jussieu (allowing for corrected spellings) included Verbena in Viticaceae, which is by Art. 18 typified by Vitex. Later he thought the name Viticaceae might be confused with Vitaceae (typified by Vitis) and so changed the name to Verbenaceae. Under Art. 18 Verbenaceaeis typified by Verbena; under any other relevant Article it is merely an illegitimate name-change and is typified by Vitex. I have, of course, adopted the former position under Art. 18 and proposed Verbenaceae for conservation. A somewhat different situation often arises when two groups have varied between family and infra-family rank in different classifications. Thus the taxon including Agave first appeared as an "infra" group of Haemodoraceae, but when Agavaceae was first validly published it included the earlier Haemodoraceae and was, therefore, illegitimate. In this and other cases I have proposed conservation of the illegitimate name from a later date and with a different circumscription (but the same type). My treatment of the alternative names of the conserved family names of Art. 18 follows the list of the 1952 Code except in the case of Guttiferae. Here the alternative must be Clusiaceae, not Hypericaceae, since the latter is very frequently regarded as a distinct family which could not then by any means be called Guttiferae. Clusiaceae was actually proposed as a suitable alternative name for Guttiferae by Lindley in 1836, and it requires conservation against the earlier (1832) Symphonia- ceae. Hypericaceae is the earliest of all these names, dating from 1789, but it did not include the Clusiaceae of Lindley. Some family names are proposed for conservation when it is clear that the 1 A similar situation exists in regard to "genus" and "species" in Necker's "Elementa Botanica", the generic names in which are applied to "species naturales", and species are referred to as "proles". 2 In his 'Familles' (1763) Adanson frequently used modern family names, but here the resemblance of his families to the modern concept ended. I have excluded also the names in Giseke's edition (1792) of his own and Fabricius' transcription of Linnaeus' Praelectiones in ordines naturales plantarum. Most of the names in that work are illegitimate, and the families (ordines naturales) are often extremely heterogeneous. - A. A. B. 2 This content downloaded from 69.74.186.251 on Sun, 23 Feb 2014 13:59:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions rejected name will also be required in modern classifications. It must be emphasized that (except in the case of homonyms) rejected names are only to be rejected so long as they are regarded as synonyms of the conserved name. Myricaceae, when first described, included Myrica and Casuarina, the latter being the type of the earlier Casuarinaceae, which also included Myrica. Myricaceae, therefore, is illegitimate and may be retained only by conservation; since none will now regard Casuarina and Myrica as confamilial, Casuarinaceaealso may be retained. It is not claimed that all such cases have been worked out; still less is it claimed that this list is complete, or that the earliest publication of names always has been found. 1 A further licence I have taken concerns spelling. The rules enjoin that except in the eight specified exceptions family names end in -aceae; the rules do not specify that incorrect endings must be of Latin form to ensure valid publication and I have often accepted French, less often German, endings in order that the real authors of family names may receive whatever credit is due to them. One difficulty I have encountered is in finding family names published during the last fifty years. The absence of some of these from the list will be noted by botanists interested in the groups concerned. I should be grateful for any such additions and also for necessary corrections of spelling and bibliography, in order that the list may be presented at the Montreal (1959) Congress in as complete and accurate a state as is possible. It must be borne in mind that in preparing this list I have used Jussieu's Genera (1789) as a starting point. I have not found it necessary to establish the month of publication, but it seems reasonable to suggest that an arbitrary date such as 1st January would be convenient. Further, my reversal of Art. 18 (i.e. a family name derived from the stem of a generic name is to be typified by the genus to which that name applies)will need the sanction of an International Congress. Some few botanists consider that the insertion of Note 1 to Art. 18 was not authorized by the Paris (1954) Congress. I have, however, taken the view that since a similar note was authorized for Art. 19, it would be illogical to exclude the note from Art. 18. It should be noted that I do not regard any name in the present list as being here validly published.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Toward a Resolution of Campanulid Phylogeny, with Special Reference to the Placement of Dipsacales
    TAXON 57 (1) • February 2008: 53–65 Winkworth & al. • Campanulid phylogeny MOLECULAR PHYLOGENETICS Toward a resolution of Campanulid phylogeny, with special reference to the placement of Dipsacales Richard C. Winkworth1,2, Johannes Lundberg3 & Michael J. Donoghue4 1 Departamento de Botânica, Instituto de Biociências, Universidade de São Paulo, Caixa Postal 11461–CEP 05422-970, São Paulo, SP, Brazil. [email protected] (author for correspondence) 2 Current address: School of Biology, Chemistry, and Environmental Sciences, University of the South Pacific, Private Bag, Laucala Campus, Suva, Fiji 3 Department of Phanerogamic Botany, The Swedish Museum of Natural History, Box 50007, 104 05 Stockholm, Sweden 4 Department of Ecology & Evolutionary Biology and Peabody Museum of Natural History, Yale University, P.O. Box 208106, New Haven, Connecticut 06520-8106, U.S.A. Broad-scale phylogenetic analyses of the angiosperms and of the Asteridae have failed to confidently resolve relationships among the major lineages of the campanulid Asteridae (i.e., the euasterid II of APG II, 2003). To address this problem we assembled presently available sequences for a core set of 50 taxa, representing the diver- sity of the four largest lineages (Apiales, Aquifoliales, Asterales, Dipsacales) as well as the smaller “unplaced” groups (e.g., Bruniaceae, Paracryphiaceae, Columelliaceae). We constructed four data matrices for phylogenetic analysis: a chloroplast coding matrix (atpB, matK, ndhF, rbcL), a chloroplast non-coding matrix (rps16 intron, trnT-F region, trnV-atpE IGS), a combined chloroplast dataset (all seven chloroplast regions), and a combined genome matrix (seven chloroplast regions plus 18S and 26S rDNA). Bayesian analyses of these datasets using mixed substitution models produced often well-resolved and supported trees.
    [Show full text]
  • Early Evolution of the Angiosperm Clade Asteraceae in the Cretaceous of Antarctica
    Early evolution of the angiosperm clade Asteraceae in the Cretaceous of Antarctica Viviana D. Barredaa,1,2, Luis Palazzesia,b,1, Maria C. Telleríac, Eduardo B. Oliverod, J. Ian Rainee, and Félix Forestb aDivisión Paleobotánica, Museo Argentino de Ciencias Naturales “Bernardino Rivadavia,” Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Cientificas y Técnicas, Buenos Aires C1405DJR, Argentina; bJodrell Laboratory, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, Richmond, Surrey TW9 3DS, United Kingdom; cLaboratorio de Sistemática y Biología Evolutiva, Museo de La Plata, La Plata B1900FWA, Argentina; dCentro Austral de Investigaciones Científicas, Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Cientificas y Técnicas, 9410 Ushuaia, Tierra del Fuego, Argentina; and eDepartment of Palaeontology, GNS Science, Lower Hutt 5040, New Zealand Edited by Michael J. Donoghue, Yale University, New Haven, CT, and approved July 15, 2015 (received for review December 10, 2014) The Asteraceae (sunflowers and daisies) are the most diverse Here we report fossil pollen evidence from exposed Campanian/ family of flowering plants. Despite their prominent role in extant Maastrichtian sediments from the Antarctic Peninsula (Fig. 1, Fig. S1, terrestrial ecosystems, the early evolutionary history of this family and SI Materials and Methods, Fossiliferous Localities)(7)thatradi- remains poorly understood. Here we report the discovery of a cally changes our understanding of the early evolution of Asteraceae. number of fossil pollen grains preserved in dinosaur-bearing deposits from the Late Cretaceous of Antarctica that drastically pushes back Results and Discussion the timing of assumed origin of the family. Reliably dated to ∼76–66 The pollen grains reported here and discovered in the Late Cre- Mya, these specimens are about 20 million years older than previ- taceous of Antarctica are tricolporate, microechinate, with long ously known records for the Asteraceae.
    [Show full text]
  • Alphabetical Lists of the Vascular Plant Families with Their Phylogenetic
    Colligo 2 (1) : 3-10 BOTANIQUE Alphabetical lists of the vascular plant families with their phylogenetic classification numbers Listes alphabétiques des familles de plantes vasculaires avec leurs numéros de classement phylogénétique FRÉDÉRIC DANET* *Mairie de Lyon, Espaces verts, Jardin botanique, Herbier, 69205 Lyon cedex 01, France - [email protected] Citation : Danet F., 2019. Alphabetical lists of the vascular plant families with their phylogenetic classification numbers. Colligo, 2(1) : 3- 10. https://perma.cc/2WFD-A2A7 KEY-WORDS Angiosperms family arrangement Summary: This paper provides, for herbarium cura- Gymnosperms Classification tors, the alphabetical lists of the recognized families Pteridophytes APG system in pteridophytes, gymnosperms and angiosperms Ferns PPG system with their phylogenetic classification numbers. Lycophytes phylogeny Herbarium MOTS-CLÉS Angiospermes rangement des familles Résumé : Cet article produit, pour les conservateurs Gymnospermes Classification d’herbier, les listes alphabétiques des familles recon- Ptéridophytes système APG nues pour les ptéridophytes, les gymnospermes et Fougères système PPG les angiospermes avec leurs numéros de classement Lycophytes phylogénie phylogénétique. Herbier Introduction These alphabetical lists have been established for the systems of A.-L de Jussieu, A.-P. de Can- The organization of herbarium collections con- dolle, Bentham & Hooker, etc. that are still used sists in arranging the specimens logically to in the management of historical herbaria find and reclassify them easily in the appro- whose original classification is voluntarily pre- priate storage units. In the vascular plant col- served. lections, commonly used methods are systema- Recent classification systems based on molecu- tic classification, alphabetical classification, or lar phylogenies have developed, and herbaria combinations of both.
    [Show full text]
  • Amaryllis – Hardy Scientific Name: Hippeastrum Johnsoni Common
    Name: Amaryllis – Hardy Scientific name: Hippeastrum johnsoni Common Names: Cluster Amaryllis, Hurricane Lily, Magic Lily, Spider Lily, Stone Garlic. Life Cycle: Hardy bulb. Height: 12 to 36 inches (30 to 90 cm). Native: Asia. Growing Region: Zones 7 to 10. Flowers: Late summer through to autumn. Flower Details: White, red, pink, orange, yellow. Lily- like. Umbel; four to eight flowers. Foliage: Slender. Long. Grow Outside: Usually grown from bulbs or vegetatively propagated plants as seed grown plants can take up to 12 years to bloom. Bulbs: 3 to 8 inches (8 to 20 cm) depending upon species. End of summer Requirements and care: Full sunlight or partial shade. Good drainage. Acidic to neutral soil. Rich soil, moist soil. Regular watering to maintain soil moisture. Requires a feed every two years; do this during the growing season. Propagate: by planting bulblets once blooming has finished. Source: http://www.plant-biology.com/Lycoris-Hardy-Amaryllis.php http://www.brecksbulbs.ca/product/Hardy-Amaryllis-Mixture/Summer_Bulbs Extension programs service people of all ages regardless of socioeconomic level, race, color, sex, religion, disability, or national origin. The Texas A&M University System, U.S. Department of Agriculture, and the County Commissioners Courts of Texas Cooperating A member of The Texas A&M University System and its statewide Agriculture Program. Common Name: Artemesia - Powis Castle Botanical name: Artemesiax Powis Castle Plant Type: Perennial Light Requirement: High Water Requirement: Low Hardiness/Zone: 4 - 8 Heat/Drought Tolerance: High Height: 3 ft Width/Spacing: 3ft Flower Color: Yellow Blooming Period: Rarely flowers Plant Form or Habit: Evergreen woody perennial, or shrub Foliage Color and Texture: Leaves are finely dissected like filigreed silver lacework.
    [Show full text]
  • Complete Chloroplast Genomes Shed Light on Phylogenetic
    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN Complete chloroplast genomes shed light on phylogenetic relationships, divergence time, and biogeography of Allioideae (Amaryllidaceae) Ju Namgung1,4, Hoang Dang Khoa Do1,2,4, Changkyun Kim1, Hyeok Jae Choi3 & Joo‑Hwan Kim1* Allioideae includes economically important bulb crops such as garlic, onion, leeks, and some ornamental plants in Amaryllidaceae. Here, we reported the complete chloroplast genome (cpDNA) sequences of 17 species of Allioideae, fve of Amaryllidoideae, and one of Agapanthoideae. These cpDNA sequences represent 80 protein‑coding, 30 tRNA, and four rRNA genes, and range from 151,808 to 159,998 bp in length. Loss and pseudogenization of multiple genes (i.e., rps2, infA, and rpl22) appear to have occurred multiple times during the evolution of Alloideae. Additionally, eight mutation hotspots, including rps15-ycf1, rps16-trnQ-UUG, petG-trnW-CCA , psbA upstream, rpl32- trnL-UAG , ycf1, rpl22, matK, and ndhF, were identifed in the studied Allium species. Additionally, we present the frst phylogenomic analysis among the four tribes of Allioideae based on 74 cpDNA coding regions of 21 species of Allioideae, fve species of Amaryllidoideae, one species of Agapanthoideae, and fve species representing selected members of Asparagales. Our molecular phylogenomic results strongly support the monophyly of Allioideae, which is sister to Amaryllioideae. Within Allioideae, Tulbaghieae was sister to Gilliesieae‑Leucocoryneae whereas Allieae was sister to the clade of Tulbaghieae‑ Gilliesieae‑Leucocoryneae. Molecular dating analyses revealed the crown age of Allioideae in the Eocene (40.1 mya) followed by diferentiation of Allieae in the early Miocene (21.3 mya). The split of Gilliesieae from Leucocoryneae was estimated at 16.5 mya.
    [Show full text]
  • Narcissus Pests
    Bulletin 51 HMSO 13s Od [65p] net Narcissus Pests Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE, FISHERIES AND FOOD Narcissus Pests Bulletin 51 LONDON HER MAJESTY'S STATIONERY OFFICE 197o First published June 1932 Sixth edition 197o The Ministry does not accept responsibility for any of the private or trade advertisements included in this publication. SBN 11 240351 4 Foreword THE growers of Narcissus have been very fortunate in that the pests of this valuable crop have received specialist attention for nearly forty years. Names like W. E. H. Hodson and L. N. Staniland, both past authors of this Bulletin, rank high in the list of pioneer researchers on bulb pests in this country. They have been followed with no less enthusiasm by the con- tributors to this sixth edition which brings up-to-date our knowledge of the important pests of the crop and tested and practical methods of control. Although the present Bulletin mainly follows the pattern laid down by Mr. Hodson in 1932 many sections have been extensively rewritten. Mr. H. C. Woodville has dealt with narcissus flies as he did in 1958, and Mr. H. G. Morgan with detection of pests in the field, stem and other eelworms and their control. Mr. A. L. Winfield covered bulb scale mite and the general problem of hot-water treatment of bulbs, and chemical dips to control stem eelworm, and also contributed the notes on miscellaneous pests. Mr. P. Aitkenhead dealt with bulb mites. Mr. J. F. Southey provided the section dealing with eelworms as vectors of virus diseases of the crop.
    [Show full text]
  • Poranthera Microphylla
    Plants of South Eastern New South Wales Flowering stems. Australian Plant Image Index, photographer Murray Fagg, near Cabrumurra Flowering plant. Photographer Don Wood, Namadgi National Park, ACT Flowering stems. Photographer Don Wood, Namadgi Line drawings. b. seed case; flowering branch; male National Park, ACT flower. E Mayfield, National Herbarium of Victoria, © 2021 Royal Botanic Gardens Board Common name Small poranthera Family Phyllanthaceae Where found Forest, woodland, heath, grassy areas, and roadsides. Widespread. Notes Annual herb to 0.2 m tall or sprawling, hairless, sometimes somewhat glaucous. Leaves opposite each other to alternating up the stems, 0.2-1.6 cm long, 1-5 mm wide, flattish in cross section, hairless, sometimes somewhat glaucous, margins slightly curved down or sometimes flat, tips blunt, usually with a short point. Male and female flowers on the same plant. Flowers with 5 white, green, or pink sepals each 0.4-1.5 mm long, and 5 white, pink, or pale mauve petals 0.2-0.6 mm long. Petals sometimes 0 in female flowers. Flowers in clusters 3-8 mm in diameter. Flowers most of the year. Family was Euphorbiaceae. All native plants on unleased land in the ACT are protected. The description above is partly taken from Halford, D.A. & Henderson, R.J.F. (2005) Studies in Euphorbiaceae, s. lat. 6. A revision of the genus Poranthera Rudge (Antidesmeae, Porantherinae) in Australia. Austrobaileya 7 (1): pages 16-19. PlantNET description: http://plantnet.rbgsyd.nsw.gov.au/cgi-bin/NSWfl.pl? page=nswfl&lvl=sp&name=Poranthera~microphylla (accessed 2 February, 2021) Author: Betty Wood.
    [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]
  • 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]
  • TELOPEA Publication Date: 13 October 1983 Til
    Volume 2(4): 425–452 TELOPEA Publication Date: 13 October 1983 Til. Ro)'al BOTANIC GARDENS dx.doi.org/10.7751/telopea19834408 Journal of Plant Systematics 6 DOPII(liPi Tmst plantnet.rbgsyd.nsw.gov.au/Telopea • escholarship.usyd.edu.au/journals/index.php/TEL· ISSN 0312-9764 (Print) • ISSN 2200-4025 (Online) Telopea 2(4): 425-452, Fig. 1 (1983) 425 CURRENT ANATOMICAL RESEARCH IN LILIACEAE, AMARYLLIDACEAE AND IRIDACEAE* D.F. CUTLER AND MARY GREGORY (Accepted for publication 20.9.1982) ABSTRACT Cutler, D.F. and Gregory, Mary (Jodrell(Jodrel/ Laboratory, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, Richmond, Surrey, England) 1983. Current anatomical research in Liliaceae, Amaryllidaceae and Iridaceae. Telopea 2(4): 425-452, Fig.1-An annotated bibliography is presented covering literature over the period 1968 to date. Recent research is described and areas of future work are discussed. INTRODUCTION In this article, the literature for the past twelve or so years is recorded on the anatomy of Liliaceae, AmarylIidaceae and Iridaceae and the smaller, related families, Alliaceae, Haemodoraceae, Hypoxidaceae, Ruscaceae, Smilacaceae and Trilliaceae. Subjects covered range from embryology, vegetative and floral anatomy to seed anatomy. A format is used in which references are arranged alphabetically, numbered and annotated, so that the reader can rapidly obtain an idea of the range and contents of papers on subjects of particular interest to him. The main research trends have been identified, classified, and check lists compiled for the major headings. Current systematic anatomy on the 'Anatomy of the Monocotyledons' series is reported. Comment is made on areas of research which might prove to be of future significance.
    [Show full text]
  • Indigenous Plant Naming and Experimentation Reveal a Plant–Insect Relationship in New Zealand Forests
    Received: 23 February 2020 Revised: 10 August 2020 Accepted: 25 August 2020 DOI: 10.1111/csp2.282 CONTRIBUTED PAPER Indigenous plant naming and experimentation reveal a plant–insect relationship in New Zealand forests Priscilla M. Wehi1,2 | Gretchen Brownstein2 | Mary Morgan-Richards1 1School of Agriculture and Environment, Massey University, Palmerston North, Abstract New Zealand Drawing from both Indigenous and “Western” scientific knowledge offers the 2Manaaki Whenua Landcare Research, opportunity to better incorporate ecological systems knowledge into conserva- Dunedin, New Zealand tion science. Here, we demonstrate a “two-eyed” approach that weaves Indige- Correspondence nous ecological knowledge (IK) with experimental data to provide detailed and Priscilla M. Wehi, Manaaki Whenua comprehensive information about regional plant–insect interactions in Landcare Research, 764 Cumberland New Zealand forests. We first examined Maori names for a common forest Street, Dunedin 9053, New Zealand. Email: [email protected], tree, Carpodetus serratus, that suggest a close species interaction between an [email protected] herbivorous, hole-dwelling insect, and host trees. We detected consistent – Funding information regional variation in both Maori names for C. serratus and the plant insect Foundation for Research, Science and relationship that reflect Hemideina spp. abundances, mediated by the presence Technology; Royal Society of New Zealand of a wood-boring moth species. We found that in regions with moths C. serratus trees are home to more weta than adjacent forest species and that these weta readily ate C. serratus leaves, fruits and seeds. These findings con- firm that a joint IK—experimental approach can stimulate new hypotheses and reveal spatially important ecological patterns.
    [Show full text]
  • Pollen Ultrastructure of the Biovulate Euphorbiaceae Author(S): Michael G
    Pollen Ultrastructure of the Biovulate Euphorbiaceae Author(s): Michael G. Simpson and Geoffrey A. Levin Reviewed work(s): Source: International Journal of Plant Sciences, Vol. 155, No. 3 (May, 1994), pp. 313-341 Published by: The University of Chicago Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2475184 . Accessed: 26/07/2012 14:35 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp . JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. The University of Chicago Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to International Journal of Plant Sciences. http://www.jstor.org Int.J. Plant Sci. 155(3):313-341.1994. ? 1994by The Universityof Chicago. All rightsreserved. 1058-5893/94/5503-0008$02.00 POLLENULTRASTRUCTURE OF THE BIOVULATE EUPHORBIACEAE MICHAEL G. SIMPSON AND GEOFFREY A. LEVIN' Departmentof Biology,San Diego StateUniversity, San Diego,California 92182-0057; and BotanyDepartment, San Diego NaturalHistory Museum, P.O. Box 1390,San Diego,California 92112 Pollenultrastructure of the biovulate Euphorbiaceae, including the subfamilies Phyllanthoideae and Oldfieldioideae,was investigatedwith light, scanning electron, and transmissionelectron microscopy. Pollenof Phyllanthoideae, represented by 12 speciesin ninegenera, was prolateto oblate,almost always 3-colporate,rarely 3-porate or pantoporate,and mostlywith reticulate, rarely baculate, echinate, or scabrate,sculpturing.
    [Show full text]