DOCSLIB.ORG

MIAMI UNIVERSITY the Graduate School Certificate for Approving The

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
MIAMI UNIVERSITY the Graduate School Certificate for Approving The MIAMI UNIVERSITY The Graduate School Certificate for Approving the Dissertation We hereby approve the Dissertation of Aaron H. Kennedy Candidate for the Degree: Doctor of Philosophy ______________________________ Director (Dr. Linda E. Watson) ______________________________ Reader (Dr. Nicholas P. Money) ______________________________ Reader (Dr. R. James Hickey) ______________________________ Reader (Dr. D. Lee Taylor) ______________________________ Graduate School Representative (Dr. David J. Berg) ABSTRACT PHYLOGENY AND EVOLUTION OF MYCORRHIZAL ASSOCIATIONS IN THE MYCO-HETEROTROPHIC HEXALECTRIS RAF. (ORCHIDACEAE : EPIDENDROIDEAE) by: Aaron H. Kennedy Some plant species have abandoned an autotrophic life style and obtain their carbon and mineral nutrition exclusively from mycorrhizal fungi. Although myco-heterotrophic species have evolved in many plant families, they are most common in the Orchidaceae. Several myco- heterotrophic orchid species have been shown to associate with a very narrow range of ectomycorrhizal forming fungi, revealing a high degree of mycorrhizal specificity. However, these studies have often investigated single or few, often unrelated, species without support for their monophyly or knowledge of their phylogenetic relationships. Using primarily molecular methods and phylogenetic analyses, this dissertation investigates i) the monophyly and circumscription of Hexalectris species, ii) interspecific phylogenetic relationships within Hexalectris, iii) the identities of the mycorrhizal fungi that associate with each Hexalectris species, iv) the breadth of mycorrhizal associations within Hexalectris and within each of its species, and v) uses a Hexalectris phylogeny as a framework for investigating mycorrhizal specificity and patterns of associations. The monophyly of H. warnockii, H. grandiflora, H. brevicaulis, and H. nitida, plus the H. spicata species complex, are well supported. The remaining species are not monophyletic, prompting the recircumscription of H. spicata s.l. as H. spicata and H. arizonica, H. revoluta s.l. as H. revoluta and H. colemanii, and H. fallax as a synonym of H. parviflora. Extreme specificity with ectomycorrhizal agaricomycete fungi was identified in each Hexalectris species. Hexalectris warnockii associates exclusively with members of the Thelephoraceae; H. brevicaulis and H. grandiflora associate exclusively with members of Russulaceae and Sebacinaceae subgroup A; the remaining species, all members of the H. spicata complex, associate strictly with members of Sebacinaceae subgroup A. Optimizing these associations onto a Hexalectris phylogeny reveals that, with one exception, each Hexalectris species associates with a different clade or group of fungal clades, and that shifts in association from one group of fungi to another occurred during each speciation event in the evolutionary history of this genus. PHYLOGENY AND EVOLUTION OF MYCORRHIZAL ASSOCIATIONS IN THE MYCO-HETEROTROPHIC HEXALECTRIS RAF. (ORCHIDACEAE : EPIDENDROIDEAE) A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of Miami University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Botany By Aaron H. Kennedy Miami University Oxford, Ohio 2009 Dissertation Director: Dr. Linda E. Watson © Aaron H. Kennedy 2009 Contents Chapter 1. Introduction……………………………………………………1 Chapter 2. Species delimitations and phylogenetic relationships in the myco-heterotrophic Hexalectris Raf. (Orchidaceae : Epidendroideae)…………….........…………………………...10 Chapter 3. Mycorrhizal specificity and patterns of host associations in the myco-heterotrophic Hexalectris (Orchidaceae : Epidendroideae)……………………........................................48 Chapter 4. Discussion: Summary and Future Directions….......................82 iii List of Tables Chapter 2 Table 1: Primers used for PCR amplification and sequencing of DNA regions included in phylogenetic analyses………….15 Table 2: Summary of individual and combined matrix partition characteristics...........................................................................20 Table 3: Summary of ITS cloning results...............................................26 Table 4: Summary of nucleotide positions suggesting additive inheritance of ITS sequences in H. revoluta var. colemanii from H. fallax and H. spicata var. arizonica…………………26 Chapter 3 Table 1: Collection location and voucher information for each Hexalectris accession included in this study………….......54-55 Table 2: A list of fungal taxa that were identified from within the roots of each Hexalectris species based on MegaBlast searches of GenBank................................................................60 Table 3: Ascomycete fungi that were identified from within the roots of Hexalectris species based on MegaBlast searches of GenBank…………………………………………62 Table 4: Summary of relative mycorrhizal specificity and phylogenetic breadth of association within the Sebacinaceae for each Hexalectris species…………………...63 iv List of Figures Chapter 2 Figure 1: Geographic distributions of Hexalectris species……….....12-13 Figure 2: Scatter plots of model corrected- versus uncorrected genetic distance of all pairwise comparisons involving Hexalectris accessions in the combined plastid matrix for accD (A) and psbA (B)……………………………21 Figure 3: Single most parsimonious phylogram and 50% majority rule Bayesian Inference tree resulting from analyses of ITS............................................................................................22 Figure 4: Strict consensus of eight most parsimonious trees and 50% majority rule Bayesian Inference tree resulting from analyses of the combined plastid matrix including psbA…......23 Figure 5: Single most parsimonious phylogram and 50% majority rule Bayesian Inference tree resulting from analyses of the combined plastid matrix excluding psbA……………………..24 Chapter 3 Figure 1: 50% majority rule Bayesian Inference tree resulting from the analysis of Sebacinaceae.....................................................61 Figure 2: 50% majority rule Bayesian Inference tree resulting from the analysis of Ceratobasidiaceae.............................................64 Figure 3: 50% majority rule Bayesian Inference tree resulting from the analysis of Russulaceae......................................................66 Figure 4: 50% majority rule Bayesian Inference tree resulting from the analysis of Thelephoraceae.................................................68 Figure 5: Phylogeny of Hexalectris with mycorrhizal associations optimized as character states……...………………………….69 v Acknowledgments I am particularly thankful to my wife Kellie Kennedy who has provided me with a great deal of support and encouragement through the PhD process. Much of Kellie’s support has involved shouldering a large share of our personal, household, and parental responsibilities. Remarkably, she has confronted these happily and with amazing grace. For this, I am sincerely grateful and forever in her debt. I also thank our daughter Ava who, although is only 22 months old and may not currently understand the contributions that she has made to her family’s success and happiness, has, if not only through her being, immeasurably improved the lives of her parents and provided meaning to their work. I also thank my mother and father who have never wavered in their emotional, philosophical, and even financial, support of my search for happiness. Also, thank you to my grandfather, J. Edward Hill, for his sincere interest and pride in my accomplishments. I thank my dissertation committee, Drs. Linda Watson, Jim Hickey, Lee Taylor, Nicholas Money, and David Berg, who have supplied me with insight, support, and necessary criticism during my studies, research, and writing. I am particularly thankful to my major advisor. Dr. Watson has very thoughtfully mentored me throughout the PhD process, carefully and accurately balancing her intervention and my independence. Also, special thanks to Dr. Taylor for his willingness to serve as a committee member despite his distance as a professor at the University of Alaska, Fairbanks, and for sharing his valuable knowledge regarding orchid mycorrhizal associations. I thank the American Orchid Society, Miami University Department of Botany, Willard Sherman Turrell Herbarium (MU), and the Ohio Garden Club for financial support of this dissertation research. Thank you to the following for access to land, and collection permission: Big Bend and Guadalupe Mountains National Parks, Briarwood - Caroline Dormon Nature Center (Natchitoches Parish, LA), Cedar Ridge Preserve (Audubon Society; Dallas, TX), Coronado National Forest, Indiana and Ohio Departments of Natural Resources, North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, The Nature Conservancy (TNC) of Ohio and The Edge of Appalachia Preserve, TNC of Texas and Davis Mountains Preserve, and University of West Alabama. I am grateful to many for their assistance with collecting Hexalectris species, but give special thanks to Pablo Carrillo-Reyes and Aaron Rodríguez, who not only very generously spent multiple weeks with me in the field in Mexico, but also took me into their homes and introduced me to their beautiful country. I am also thankful to Paul Martin Brown, Marcy Brown-Marsden, Ronald Coleman, Frank Farruggia, Rick Gardner, Roberto González-Tamayo, John Karges, Allison Leavitt, Larry Magrath, Al Schotz, Joe Sirotnak, Victoria Sosa, Bonnie Stolp, and Michael Vincent for assistance with collections and permits. Thank you to Neil Winn
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Guide to the Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia, and Georgia, Working Draft of 17 March 2004 -- LILIACEAE
    Guide to the Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia, and Georgia, Working Draft of 17 March 2004 -- LILIACEAE LILIACEAE de Jussieu 1789 (Lily Family) (also see AGAVACEAE, ALLIACEAE, ALSTROEMERIACEAE, AMARYLLIDACEAE, ASPARAGACEAE, COLCHICACEAE, HEMEROCALLIDACEAE, HOSTACEAE, HYACINTHACEAE, HYPOXIDACEAE, MELANTHIACEAE, NARTHECIACEAE, RUSCACEAE, SMILACACEAE, THEMIDACEAE, TOFIELDIACEAE) As here interpreted narrowly, the Liliaceae constitutes about 11 genera and 550 species, of the Northern Hemisphere. There has been much recent investigation and re-interpretation of evidence regarding the upper-level taxonomy of the Liliales, with strong suggestions that the broad Liliaceae recognized by Cronquist (1981) is artificial and polyphyletic. Cronquist (1993) himself concurs, at least to a degree: "we still await a comprehensive reorganization of the lilies into several families more comparable to other recognized families of angiosperms." Dahlgren & Clifford (1982) and Dahlgren, Clifford, & Yeo (1985) synthesized an early phase in the modern revolution of monocot taxonomy. Since then, additional research, especially molecular (Duvall et al. 1993, Chase et al. 1993, Bogler & Simpson 1995, and many others), has strongly validated the general lines (and many details) of Dahlgren's arrangement. The most recent synthesis (Kubitzki 1998a) is followed as the basis for familial and generic taxonomy of the lilies and their relatives (see summary below). References: Angiosperm Phylogeny Group (1998, 2003); Tamura in Kubitzki (1998a). Our “liliaceous” genera (members of orders placed in the Lilianae) are therefore divided as shown below, largely following Kubitzki (1998a) and some more recent molecular analyses. ALISMATALES TOFIELDIACEAE: Pleea, Tofieldia. LILIALES ALSTROEMERIACEAE: Alstroemeria COLCHICACEAE: Colchicum, Uvularia. LILIACEAE: Clintonia, Erythronium, Lilium, Medeola, Prosartes, Streptopus, Tricyrtis, Tulipa. MELANTHIACEAE: Amianthium, Anticlea, Chamaelirium, Helonias, Melanthium, Schoenocaulon, Stenanthium, Veratrum, Toxicoscordion, Trillium, Xerophyllum, Zigadenus.
    [Show full text]
  • Gymnomyces Xerophilus Sp. Nov. (Sequestrate Russulaceae), an Ectomycorrhizal Associate of Quercus in California
    MYCOLOGICAL RESEARCH I I0 (2006) 57 5-582 Gymnomyces xerophilus sp. nov. (sequestrate Russulaceae), an ectomycorrhizal associate of Quercus in California Matthew E. SMITHa1*,James M. TRAPPE~,Dauid M. RIZZOa, Steven I. MILLERC 'Department of Plant Pathology, University of California at Davis, Davis CA 95616, USA b~epartmentof Forest Science, Oregon State University, Camallis, OR 97331-5752, USA CDeparhnentof Botany, University of Wyoming, Laramie, WY 82071, USA ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Article history: Gymnomyces xerophilus sp. nov., a sequestrate species in the Russulaceae, is characterized Received 30 August 2005 and descn'bed morphologically as a new species from Quercus-dominated woodlands in Accepted 14 February 2006 California. ITS sequences recovered from healthy, ectomycorrhizal roots of Quercus dougla- Corresponding Editor: Michael Weiss sii and Q. wislizeni matched those of G. xerophfius basidiomata, confirming the ectomycor- -- rhizal status of this fungus. Phylogenetic analysis of the ITS region places G. xerophilus in Keywords: a clade with both agaricoid (Russula in the section Polychromae) and sequestrate (Gymno- Basidiomycota myces, Cystangium) relatives. We include a dichotomous key to the species of Gymnomyces Hypogeous fungi associated with Quercus. ITS O 2006 The British Mycological Society. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Molecular phylogeny Russula Introduction mycelium, potentially reducing drought stress (Duddridge et al. 1980; Parke et al. 1983). Quercus-dominated ecosystems cover about one third of dali- Although the EM fungi associated with Quercus in California fornia's 404,000bm2(Pavlik et al. 1991). Quercus spp. are well have not been studied extensively, Thiers (1984) and Trappe adapted to the state's extensive areas of dry, Mediterranean and Claridge (2005) suggest that seasonally dry climates exert climate, with at least 7 species considered endemic (Nixon a selection pressure towards a sequestrate fruiting habit in 2002).
    [Show full text]
  • Redalyc.MAIN FUNGAL PARTNERS and DIFFERENT LEVELS OF
    Lankesteriana International Journal on Orchidology ISSN: 1409-3871 [email protected] Universidad de Costa Rica Costa Rica Suárez, Juan Pablo; Kottke, Ingrid MAIN FUNGAL PARTNERS AND DIFFERENT LEVELS OF SPECIFICITY OF ORCHID MYCORRHIZAE IN THE TROPICAL MOUNTAIN FORESTS OF ECUADOR Lankesteriana International Journal on Orchidology, vol. 16, núm. 2, 2016 Universidad de Costa Rica Cartago, Costa Rica Available in: http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=44347813012 How to cite Complete issue Scientific Information System More information about this article Network of Scientific Journals from Latin America, the Caribbean, Spain and Portugal Journal's homepage in redalyc.org Non-profit academic project, developed under the open access initiative LANKESTERIANA 16(2): 00–00. 2016. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.15517/lank.v15i2.00000 MAIN FUNGAL PARTNERS AND DIFFERENT LEVELS OF SPECIFICITY OF ORCHID MYCORRHIZAE IN THE TROPICAL MOUNTAIN FORESTS OF ECUADOR JUAN PABLO SUÁREZ1,3 & INGRID KOTTKE2 1 Departamento de Ciencias Naturales, Universidad Técnica Particular de Loja, San Cayetano Alto s/n C.P. 11 01 608, Loja, Ecuador* 2 Plant Evolutionary Ecology, Institute of Evolution and Ecology, Eberhard-Karls-University Tübingen, Auf der Morgenstelle 1, 72076 Tübingen, Germany; retired 3 Corresponding author: [email protected] ABSTRACT. Orchids are a main component of the diversity of vascular plants in Ecuador with approximately 4000 species representing about 5.3% of the orchid species described worldwide. More than a third of these species are endemics. As orchids, in contrast to other plants, depend on mycorrhizal fungi already for seed germination and early seedling establishment, availability of appropriate fungi may strongly influence distribution of orchid populations.
    [Show full text]
  • Phylogenetic Relationships of Rhizoctonia Fungi Within the Cantharellales
    fungal biology 120 (2016) 603e619 journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/funbio Phylogenetic relationships of Rhizoctonia fungi within the Cantharellales Dolores GONZALEZa,*, Marianela RODRIGUEZ-CARRESb, Teun BOEKHOUTc, Joost STALPERSc, Eiko E. KURAMAEd, Andreia K. NAKATANIe, Rytas VILGALYSf, Marc A. CUBETAb aInstituto de Ecologıa, A.C., Red de Biodiversidad y Sistematica, Carretera Antigua a Coatepec No. 351, El Haya, 91070 Xalapa, Veracruz, Mexico bDepartment of Plant Pathology, North Carolina State University, Center for Integrated Fungal Research, Campus Box 7251, Raleigh, NC 27695, USA cCBS Fungal Biodiversity Centre, Uppsalalaan 8, 3584 CT Utrecht, The Netherlands dDepartment of Microbial Ecology, Netherlands Institute of Ecology (NIOO/KNAW), Droevendaalsesteeg 10, 6708 PB Wageningen, The Netherlands eUNESP, Faculdade de Ci^encias Agronomicas,^ CP 237, 18603-970 Botucatu, SP, Brazil fDepartment of Biology, Duke University, Durham, NC 27708, USA article info abstract Article history: Phylogenetic relationships of Rhizoctonia fungi within the order Cantharellales were studied Received 2 January 2015 using sequence data from portions of the ribosomal DNA cluster regions ITS-LSU, rpb2, tef1, Received in revised form and atp6 for 50 taxa, and public sequence data from the rpb2 locus for 165 taxa. Data sets 1 January 2016 were analysed individually and combined using Maximum Parsimony, Maximum Likeli- Accepted 19 January 2016 hood, and Bayesian Phylogenetic Inference methods. All analyses supported the mono- Available online 29 January 2016 phyly of the family Ceratobasidiaceae, which comprises the genera Ceratobasidium and Corresponding Editor: Thanatephorus. Multi-locus analysis revealed 10 well-supported monophyletic groups that Joseph W. Spatafora were consistent with previous separation into anastomosis groups based on hyphal fusion criteria.
    [Show full text]
  • Epidendrum Secundum (Orchidaceae)
    Plant Biology ISSN 1435-8603 RESEARCH PAPER Reproductive biology and pollination mechanisms of Epidendrum secundum (Orchidaceae). Floral variation: a consequence of natural hybridization? E. R. Pansarin & M. C. E. Amaral Departamento de Botaˆ nica, Instituto de Biologia, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Sa˜ o Paulo, Brazil Keywords ABSTRACT Epidendroideae; Epidendrum; Laeliinae; Orchidaceae; pollination; reproductive biology. The phenology, flower morphology, pollination mechanism and reproductive biology of Epidendrum secundum were studied in a semi-deciduous forest at Correspondence the Serra do Japi (SJ), and in the Atlantic rain forest of Picinguaba, both E. R. Pansarin, Departamento de Biologia natural reserves in the State of Sa˜o Paulo, southeastern Brazil. E. secundum Aplicada, Universidade Estadual Paulista, flowers all year round, with a flowering peak between September and FCAV, 14884-900, Jaboticabal, SP, Brazil. January. This species is either a lithophytic or terrestrial herb in the SJ, E-mail: [email protected] whereas, in Picinguaba, it grows mainly in disturbed areas along roadsides. E. secundum is pollinated by several species of diurnal Lepidoptera at both Editor study sites. In Picinguaba, where E. secundum is sympatric with E. fulgens M. Ayasse and both share the same pollinators, pollen transference between these two species was recorded. E. secundum is self-compatible but pollinator-depen- Received: 25 March 2007; Accepted: 22 May dent. It is inter-compatible with E. fulgens, producing fertile seeds. In con- 2007 trast to the population of the SJ, in the Picinguaba region, floral morphology is quite variable among plants and some individuals present doi:10.1111/j.1438-8677.2007.00025.x flowers with characteristics in-between both sympatric species, suggesting that natural hybridization occasionally occurs.
    [Show full text]
  • Divergence in Mycorrhizal Specialization Within Hexalectris Spicata (Orchidaceae), a Nonphotosynthetic Desert Orchid1
    American Journal of Botany 90(8): 1168±1179. 2003. DIVERGENCE IN MYCORRHIZAL SPECIALIZATION WITHIN HEXALECTRIS SPICATA (ORCHIDACEAE), A NONPHOTOSYNTHETIC DESERT ORCHID1 D. LEE TAYLOR,2,4 THOMAS D. BRUNS,3 TIMOTHY M. SZARO,3 AND SCOTT A. HODGES2 2Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Marine Biology, University of California, Santa Barbara, California 93106 USA; and 3Department of Plant and Microbial Biology, University of California, Berkeley, California 94720 USA Evidence is accumulating for specialized yet evolutionarily dynamic associations between orchids and their mycorrhizal fungi. However, the frequency of tight mycorrhizal speci®city and the phylogenetic scale of changes in speci®city within the Orchidaceae are presently unknown. We used microscopic observations and PCR-based methods to address these questions in three taxa of non- photosynthetic orchids within the Hexalectris spicata complex. Fungal ITS RFLP analysis and sequences of the ITS and nuclear LSU ribosomal gene fragments allowed us to identify the fungi colonizing 25 individuals and 50 roots. Thanatephorus ochraceus (Cera- tobasidiaceae) was an occasional colonizer of mycorrhizal roots and nonmycorrhizal rhizomes. Members of the Sebacinaceae were the primary mycorrhizal fungi in every Hexalectris root and were phylogenetically intermixed with ectomycorrhizal taxa. These associates fell into six ITS RFLP types labeled B through G. Types B, C, D, and G were found in samples of H. spicata var. spicata, while only type E was found in H. spicata var. arizonica and only type F was found in H. revoluta. These results provide preliminary evidence for divergence in mycorrhizal speci®city between these two closely related orchid taxa. We hypothesize that mycorrhizal interactions have contributed to the evolutionary diversi®cation of the Orchidaceae.
    [Show full text]
  • Native Orchids of Oklahoma Dr. Lawrence K. Magrath Curator-USAO
    Oklahoma Native Plant Record 39 Volume 1, Number 1, December 2001 Native Orchids of Oklahoma Dr. Lawrence K. Magrath Curator-USAO (OCLA) Herbarium Chickasha, OK 73018-5358 As of the publication of this paper Oklahoma is known to have orchids of 33 species in 18 genera, which compares to 20 species and 11 genera reported by Waterfall (1969). Four of the 33 species are possibly extinct in the state based on current survey work. The greatest concentration of orchid species is in the southeastern corner of the state (Atoka, Bryan, Choctaw, LeFlore, McCurtain and Pushmataha Counties). INTRODUCTION Since the time of Confucius (551-479 BCE) who mentioned lan in his writings, "acquaintance with The family Orchidaceae is the largest of the good men was like entering a room full of lan or families of flowering plants with somewhere between fragrant orchids" (Withner, 1959), orchids have been 25,000 and 35,000 species, with new species important in many facets of Chinese life including continually being described. There are also literature, painting, horticulture, and not least, numerous natural and artificial hybrids. The only medicine". They are mentioned in the materia place where orchids are not known to occur is medica, “Sheng nung pen ts'ao ching”, tracing back Antarctica. to the legendary emperor Sheng Nung (ca. 28th Orchids fascinate us because of the century BCE). The term "lan hua" in early Chinese seemingly infinite combinations of colors and forms records refers to species of the genus Cymbidium that are found in orchid flowers from the Arctic to (Withner, 1959), most likely Cymbidium the tropical rain forests.
    [Show full text]
  • Regional-Scale In-Depth Analysis of Soil Fungal Diversity Reveals Strong Ph and Plant Species Effects in Northern Europe
    fmicb-11-01953 September 9, 2020 Time: 11:41 # 1 ORIGINAL RESEARCH published: 04 September 2020 doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2020.01953 Regional-Scale In-Depth Analysis of Soil Fungal Diversity Reveals Strong pH and Plant Species Effects in Northern Europe Leho Tedersoo1*, Sten Anslan1,2, Mohammad Bahram1,3, Rein Drenkhan4, Karin Pritsch5, Franz Buegger5, Allar Padari4, Niloufar Hagh-Doust1, Vladimir Mikryukov6, Daniyal Gohar1, Rasekh Amiri1, Indrek Hiiesalu1, Reimo Lutter4, Raul Rosenvald1, Edited by: Elisabeth Rähn4, Kalev Adamson4, Tiia Drenkhan4,7, Hardi Tullus4, Katrin Jürimaa4, Saskia Bindschedler, Ivar Sibul4, Eveli Otsing1, Sergei Põlme1, Marek Metslaid4, Kaire Loit8, Ahto Agan1, Université de Neuchâtel, Switzerland Rasmus Puusepp1, Inge Varik1, Urmas Kõljalg1,9 and Kessy Abarenkov9 Reviewed by: 1 2 Tesfaye Wubet, Institute of Ecology and Earth Sciences, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia, Zoological Institute, Technische Universität 3 Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Braunschweig, Brunswick, Germany, Department of Ecology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, 4 5 Research (UFZ), Germany Sweden, Institute of Forestry and Rural Engineering, Estonian University of Life Sciences, Tartu, Estonia, Helmholtz 6 Christina Hazard, Zentrum München – Deutsches Forschungszentrum für Gesundheit und Umwelt (GmbH), Neuherberg, Germany, Chair of Ecole Centrale de Lyon, France Forest Management Planning and Wood Processing Technologies, Institute of Plant and Animal Ecology, Ural Branch, Russian Academy of Sciences, Yekaterinburg, Russia, 7 Forest Health and Biodiversity, Natural Resources Institute Finland *Correspondence: (Luke), Helsinki, Finland, 8 Chair of Plant Health, Estonian University of Life Sciences, Tartu, Estonia, 9 Natural History Leho Tedersoo Museum and Botanical Garden, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia [email protected] Specialty section: Soil microbiome has a pivotal role in ecosystem functioning, yet little is known about This article was submitted to its build-up from local to regional scales.
    [Show full text]
  • Classification of Plants
    Classification of Plants Plants are classified in several different ways, and the further away from the garden we get, the more the name indicates a plant's relationship to other plants, and tells us about its place in the plant world rather than in the garden. Usually, only the Family, Genus and species are of concern to the gardener, but we sometimes include subspecies, variety or cultivar to identify a particular plant. Starting from the top, the highest category, plants have traditionally been classified as follows. Each group has the characteristics of the level above it, but has some distinguishing features. The further down the scale you go, the more minor the differences become, until you end up with a classification which applies to only one plant. Written convention indicated with underlined text KINGDOM Plant or animal DIVISION (PHYLLUM) CLASS Angiospermae (Angiosperms) Plants which produce flowers Gymnospermae (Gymnosperms) Plants which don't produce flowers SUBCLASS Dicotyledonae (Dicotyledons, Dicots) Plants with two seed leaves Monocotyledonae (Monocotyledons, Monocots) ‐ Plants with one seed leaf SUPERORDER A group of related Plant Families, classified in the order in which they are thought to have developed their differences from a common ancestor. There are six Superorders in the Dicotyledonae (Magnoliidae, Hamamelidae, Caryophyllidae, Dilleniidae, Rosidae, Asteridae), and four Superorders in the Monocotyledonae (Alismatidae, Commelinidae, Arecidae, Liliidae). The names of the Superorders end in ‐idae ORDER ‐ Each Superorder is further divided into several Orders. The names of the Orders end in ‐ales FAMILY ‐ Each Order is divided into Families. These are plants with many botanical features in common, and is the highest classification normally used.
    [Show full text]
  • Class Monocotyledonae
    ACORUS/ACORACEAE 1077 CLASS MONOCOTYLEDONAE Plants usually herbaceous—in other words, lacking regular secondary thickening (except Palmaceae, Smilacaceae, most Agavaceae, and a few Poaceae); seedlings usually with 1 seed leaf or cotyledon; stems or branches elongating by apical growth and also by growth of basal por- tion of internodes; leaves when present alternate, whorled, basal, or rarely opposite, elongating by basal growth (readily seen on spring-flowering bulbs whose leaf-tips have been frozen back); leaf blades usually with parallel or concentrically curved veins, these unbranched or with inconspicuous, short, transverse connectives (leaves net-veined or with prominent midrib and spreading side-veins parallel with each other in Alismataceae, Araceae, Smilacaceae, Marantaceae, and some Orchidaceae); perianth with dissimilar inner and outer whorls (petals and sepals), or all parts about alike (tepals), the parianth parts separate or united, commonly in 3s, less often in 2s, rarely in 5s, or perianth of scales or bristles, or entirely absent. AWorldwide, the Monocotyledonae is a group composed of ca. 55,800 species in 2,652 genera arranged in 84 families (Mabberley 1997); 25 of these families occur in nc TX. The monocots appear to be a well-supported monophyletic group derived from within the monosulcate Magnoliidae group of dicots (Chase et al. 1993; Duvall et al. 1993; Qiu et al. 1993). From the cla- distic standpoint, the dicots are therefore paraphyletic and thus inappropriate for formal recog- nition (see explantion and Fig. 41 in Apendix 6). Within the monocots, Acorus appears to be the sister group to all other monocots, with the Alismataceae (and Potamogeton) being the next most basal group (Duvall et al.
    [Show full text]
  • The Plants Are Pseudobulbous Terrestrials, with Large Plicate Year's
    Taxonomic revision of the genus Acanthephippium (Orchidaceae) S.A. Thomas Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 3AB, England (Drawings by the author) Summary This is revision of the Blume. Eleven Seven a genus Acanthephippium species are recognised. names are time A. A. A. A. here for the first reduced to synonymy (A. lycaste, odoratum, papuanum, pictum, sim- plex, A. sinense, and A. thailandicum). Introduction Acanthephippium is a genus of eleven species distributedin Southeast Asia from Sri Lanka to Nepal and north to Japan, all over the Malesian Archipelago and in many islands in the Pacific. The genus was established by Blume in 1825 with one species, Acanthephippium javanicum. The generic name is derived from two Greek roots: acantha (thorn) and ephippion (sad- dle), the former referring to the long slender column, and the latter to the saddle-shaped lip. Blume (1825) first published the generic name as Acanthophippium, an orthographi- his cal error which he corrected in the preface of Flora Javae (1828). The older spelling authors. I have followed who stated: "Since was followed by several Sprague (1928) the spelling Acanthophippium contains a definite (and apparently unintentional) orthographic the of the initial letter of and the alteration error, namely missing ephippium (a saddle) to Acanthephippium involves no risk of confusion or error, the latter spelling should be adopted." The plants are pseudobulbous terrestrials, with large plicate leaves. The inflorescence is lateral from the new year's growth, and much shorter than the leaves so that the flowers are mostly displayed low downon the plant. The flowers are large and fleshy, usually 3-4 lesser fused into cm long.
    [Show full text]
  • Flora of North Central Texas Flora of North Central Texas
    SHINNERS & MAHLER’S FLOR A OF NORTH CENTRAL TEXAS GEORGE M. DIGGSIGGS,, JJR.. BBARNEY L. LIPSCOMBIPSCOMB ROBERT J. O’KENNON D VEGETATIONAL AREAS OF TEXAS MODIFIED FROM CHECKLIST OF THE VASCULAR PLANTS OF TEXAS (HATCH ET AL. 1990). NEARLY IDENTICAL MAPS HAVE BEEN USED IN NUMEROUS WORKS ON TEXAS INCLUDING GOULD (1962) AND CORRELL AND JOHNSTON (1970). 1 PINEYWOODS 2 GULF PRAIRIES AND MARSHEs 3 POST OAK SAVANNAH 4 BLACKLAND PRAIRIES 5 CROSS TIMBERS AND PRAIRIES 6 SOUTH TEXAS PLAINS 7 EDWARDS PLATEAU 8 ROLLING PLAINS 9 HIGH PLAINS 10 TRANS-PECOS, MOUNTAINS AND BASINS D VEGETATIONAL AREAS OF NORTH CENTRAL TEXAS D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D SHINNERS & MAHLER’S ILLUSTRATED FLORA OF NORTH CENTRAL TEXAS Shinners & Mahler’s ILLUSTRATED FLORA OF NORTH CENTRAL TEXAS IS PUBLISHED WITH THE SUPPORT OF: MAJOR BENEFACTORS: NEW DOROTHEA L. LEONHARDT FOUNDATION (ANDREA C. HARKINS) BASS FOUNDATION ROBERT J. O’KENNON RUTH ANDERSSON MAY MARY G. PALKO AMON G. CARTER FOUNDATION MARGRET M. RIMMER MIKE AND EVA SANDLIN INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT: AUSTIN COLLEGE BOTANICAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE OF TEXAS SID RICHARDSON CAREER DEVELOPMENT FUND OF AUSTIN COLLEGE OTHER CONTRIBUTORS: PEG AND BEN KEITH FRIENDS OF HAGERMAN NAT IONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE SUMMERLEE FOUNDATION JOHN D.
    [Show full text]