DOCSLIB.ORG

The Architecture of the Lembophyllaceae (Musci)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Architecture of the Lembophyllaceae (Musci) J Hattori Bot. lab. No. 84: 37-47 (July 1998) THE ARCHITECTURE OF THE LEMBOPHYLLACEAE (MUSCI) R. S. TANGNEY1 ABSTRACT. An analysis of the architecture of the Lembophyllaceae is presented and its value in the taxonomy of the family is assessed. The Lembophyllaceae produce a variety of growth forms, rang­ ing from creeping mats to loose erect-ascendant wefts and pendant fronds. Characters of stem orien­ tation, branching, rhizoid distribution, leaf orientation, size and shape, and the production of determi­ nate or indeterminate growth are used to describe merophyte development. Variation in the pattern of merophyte development yields an architectural pattern common to taxa, and the genera differ from each other in their relative expression of this pattern. The same architecture is therefore seen to un­ derlie the various growth forms exhibited. K EY WORDS: mosses, Lembophyllaceae, architecture, ontogeny, heterochrony. INTRODUCTION The Lembophyllaceae are a Southern Hemisphere family of pleurocarpous mosses, occurring in Australasia and southern South America. During its history, the family has in­ cluded a diversity of unrelated elements that in recent years have been transferred to other families (Buck 1980, 1994; Vitt 1984; Crum 1991 ; Tangney 1996, I 997b ). While the fami­ ly recognised in a more restricted sense (than that, for example, of Brotherus 1924- 25) is morphologically more coherent, there remain difficulties in the separation of the genera. These problems are related to the extreme variability of species in the family. This plastici­ ty is associated with variation in the underlying architecture (Tangney 1996). This descrip­ tion of the architecture aims to provide a basis for the understanding of the variability of the species, as well as the inter-relations of the genera. ARCHITECTURE AND GROWTH FORM. The term architecture is not generally used in reference to bryophytes. Rather, the cat­ egories of growth-form and life-form have traditionally been employed to describe the morphological aspects of branching pattern and overall appearance (physiognomy) of bryophytes, respectively. While there is a clear difference in the definition of these terms, their usage has been ambiguous and the value of growth-form in morphological analysis has been eroded. Magdefrau (1982) considered growth-forms to be the" ... genetically fixed method of ramification'', i.e., characteristic of an individual, and life-forms to be an " ... as­ semblage of individuals and growth-form, modified by external conditions'', i.e., character­ istic of a group of individuals. Growth-form is therefore subordinate to life form as it is a component of the latter. While the distinction between the two categories is clear, the use of the terms has been confusing. For example, Magdefrau (1982) cited earlier authors' defi­ nitions of growth form as being strictly morphological, yet considered growth form to be modified by the external environment. 1 Department of Botany, University ofOtago, P 0 Box 56, Dunedin, New Zealand. 38 J. Hattori Bot. Lab. No. 84 I 9 9 8 Gimingham and Robertson (1947) produced a growth-form classification based on that of Meusel (1935). Their modifications to Meusel's detailed system explicitly gave more importance to "general growth morphology" than to branching pattern. Thus their 'growth form' became an index of environmental influence rather than genetically fixed. Therefore, both life-form and growth-form systems have come to produce very simi­ lar classifications, even sharing descriptive terms, for example turf, weft, cushion and mat (see Magdefrau 1982 and Richards 1984). This, coupled with the environmental influence associated with growth-forms, has led to a perception that characters of the growth-form have little value in taxonomy. Because of the ambiguity surrounding growth-forms, the term architecture, as applied to vascular plants, is preferred. Both Mishler and De Luna ( 1991) and La Farge-England (1996) have shifted the emphasis of growth-form study back to an architectural analysis. The architecture of a plant is the result of meristematic activity, a developmental sequence which is independent of physiognomy, biological type or taxonomic position (Halle and Oldeman 1975). The use of the term architecture emphasises the analysis of the develop­ mental branching pattern rather than overall appearance (Mishler and De Luna 1991 ). Bryophytes may therefore exhibit similar architectures to other groups of plants, and differ­ ent 'growth-forms' may be produced by similar architectures. Mishler and De Luna ( 1991) outlined a hierarchical framework for ontogenetic de­ scription ofbryophytes. It utilises some terminology applied to vascular plants and consists of five hierarchical levels of development; the cell, the metamer (=the merophyte), the module (=the branch), the branch system (=the shoot), and the shoot system. Differentia­ tion occurs at each level and may vary within each level depending on the developmental level of the higher stage. For example, merophyte development may vary both within a branch and between branches of the same shoot. The pattern of merophyte development and the timing and pattern of the structures produced, therefore yields an architectural pat­ tern that may be used to compare taxa. THE LEMBOPHYLLACEAE The Lembophyllaceae are characterised by morphological variation within taxa such that no characters are discontinuous between the genera. Dixon ( 1927) considered that the species were easy enough to recognise, but that the genera were not. For example, Camp­ tochaete exhibits frequent variation on its dendroid-stipitate architecture. This flexibility of form, combined with vigorous growth produces plants that blur species boundaries. Some of these forms (called 'deflexa' forms by Dixon, 1927) have been a source of superfluous names, and previous authors have noted taxonomic difficulties associated with variability (Dixon 1927, Sainsbury 1955, Scott and Stone 1976, Crum 1991 ). This variability is a function of plant architecture (Tangney 1996), and this explication of the architecture and variation of the Lembophyllaceae is aimed at an understanding of the variation observed. In pleurocarpous mosses, growth of the apical cell is not terminated by gametangial production, i.e. module growth is not determinate as in acrocarpous mosses. Therefore, there is the potential for greater differentiation within modules. In this analysis, characters are utilised as indicators of merophyte development within the levels of module and branch R. S. TANGNEY: Architecture of the Lembophyllaceae 39 system (shoot). This pattern ofmerophyte development is used to compare the taxa. Characters utilised: Stem orientation Orthotropy: growth mostly erect with radial symmetry Plagiotropy: growth mostly horizontal with flattened (complanate) growth Branching (presence or absence) Growth Monopodial: the continuous activity of a single apical cell. Sympodial: growth from lateral apical cells. For example, when growth of the frond axis api­ cal cell stops, growth of new modules, comes from lateral apical cells. Growth Determinate: Growth producing a fixed structure or number of structures only, e.g. a leaf, a sporophyte, or a branch of fixed length. Indeterminate: Growth producing a succession of structures of no fixed number, e.g., the main axis of a pleurocarpous moss. Rhizoid distribution Leaf orientation, size and shape DESCRIPTION OF TAXA Camptochaete exhibits a diversity of architectural pattern which encompasses that of the other genera. Camptochaete is described in detail, and the other genera are compared to it. The genera are seen to differ from each other in the relative expression of the same un­ derlying pattern. Observations are based on studies of herbarium, field, and cultivated ma­ terial. Camptochaete Reichdt. Ten species in two sections (Tangney l 997a). Details of the archi­ tecture of the two sections differ. The architecture of species in Sect. Camptochaete is de­ scribed, and differences with sect. Thamniella are noted below. Camptochaete sect. Camptochaete Growth form (Fig. 1.). Plants are erect-ascendant, forming loose wefts, and occasion­ ally, distal stems and branches may be pendant. Rarely, plants are found in unattached loose-lying "moss-balls" on the forest floor. Stem differentiation present. Erect stems are produced from creeping stolons. Stems consist of a lower unbranched stipe and an upper branched frond. Stolon growth is pla­ giotropic; creeping with rhizoids scattered. Leaves erect and imbricate, often erose. Stipe growth is orthotropic, developed from the creeping stolon by the stolon tip becoming erect. Leaves of the stipe are erect and imbricate. The stipe is usually unbranched and rhizoids are absent. Fronds are plagiotropic; with irregular bi-tripinnate branching usually produc­ ing flattened fronds. Fronds are determinate, with lateral branches determinate and the frond axis also usually determinate. Reiteration. Reiteration of the branch system occurs either sympodially or monopodi­ ally. Sympodial innovations arise as lateral branches from the base of the stipe, and are ini­ tially plagiotropic (stolon), become orthotropic (stipe), and then plagiotropic (frond). 40 J. Hattori Bot. Lab. No. 84 I 9 9 8 Camptochaete a Fig. I. Architecture of Camptochaete. a. stolon, b. stipe, c. frond, d. stoloniferous or flagelliferous growth of the frond, e. elongate or 'deflexa' form. Growth of module a-b-c is monopodial. Reiteration is either sympodial or monopodial at d., or sympodial
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Comparison of the Moss Floras of Chile and New Zealand Studies in Austral Temperate Rain Forest Bryophytes 17
    CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by Hochschulschriftenserver - Universität Frankfurt am Main Comparison of the moss floras of Chile and New Zealand 81 Tropical Bryology 21: 81-92, 2002 A comparison of the moss floras of Chile and New Zealand Studies in austral temperate rain forest bryophytes 17 Rolf Blöcher, Jan-Peter Frahm Botanisches Institut der Universität, Meckenheimer Allee 170, 53115 Bonn, Germany Summary: Chile and New Zealand share a common stock of 181 species of mosses in 94 genera and 34 families. This number counts for 23.3% of the Chilean and 34.6% of the New Zealand moss flora. If only species with austral distribution are taken into account, the number is reduced to 113 species in common, which is 14.5% of the Chilean and 21.6% of the New Zealand moss flora. This correlation is interpreted in terms of long distance dispersal resp. the common phytogeographical background of both countries as parts of the palaoaustral floristic region and compared with disjunct moss floras of other continents as well as the presently available molecular data. Introduction Herzog (1926) made no attempts to explain the Herzog (1926) called disjunctions the “most floristic similarity of these regions, although interesting problems in phytogeography and their Wegener (1915) had published his continental explanation the greatest importance for genetic drift theory already 11 years before the aspects”. One of these interesting disjunctions is publication of Herzog´s textbook. This theory that between the southern part of Chile, New was, however, not accepted by scientists and Zealand (and also southeastern Australia, therefore not even discussed by Herzog but Tasmania and southern Africa).
    [Show full text]
  • PDF, Also Known As Version of Record License (If Available): CC by Link to Published Version (If Available): 10.1111/Nph.14553
    Coudert, Y., Bell, N., Edelin, C., & Harrison, C. J. (2017). Multiple innovations underpinned branching form diversification in mosses. New Phytologist, 215(2), 840-850. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.14553 Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record License (if available): CC BY Link to published version (if available): 10.1111/nph.14553 Link to publication record in Explore Bristol Research PDF-document This is the final published version of the article (version of record). It first appeared online via Wiley at http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/nph.14553/full. Please refer to any applicable terms of use of the publisher. University of Bristol - Explore Bristol Research General rights This document is made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the reference above. Full terms of use are available: http://www.bristol.ac.uk/red/research-policy/pure/user-guides/ebr-terms/ Research Multiple innovations underpinned branching form diversification in mosses Yoan Coudert1,2,3, Neil E. Bell4, Claude Edelin5 and C. Jill Harrison1,3 1School of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol, Life Sciences Building, 24 Tyndall Avenue, Bristol, BS8 1TQ, UK; 2Institute of Systematics, Evolution and Biodiversity, CNRS, Natural History Museum Paris, UPMC Sorbonne University, EPHE, 57 rue Cuvier, 75005 Paris, France; 3Department of Plant Sciences, University of Cambridge, Downing Street, Cambridge, CB2 3EA, UK; 4Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh, 20a Inverleith Row, Edinburgh, EH3 5LR, UK; 5UMR 3330, UMIFRE 21, French Institute of Pondicherry, CNRS, 11 Saint Louis Street, Pondicherry 605001, India Summary Author for correspondence: Broad-scale evolutionary comparisons have shown that branching forms arose by con- C.
    [Show full text]
  • Spore Dispersal Vectors
    Glime, J. M. 2017. Adaptive Strategies: Spore Dispersal Vectors. Chapt. 4-9. In: Glime, J. M. Bryophyte Ecology. Volume 1. 4-9-1 Physiological Ecology. Ebook sponsored by Michigan Technological University and the International Association of Bryologists. Last updated 3 June 2020 and available at <http://digitalcommons.mtu.edu/bryophyte-ecology/>. CHAPTER 4-9 ADAPTIVE STRATEGIES: SPORE DISPERSAL VECTORS TABLE OF CONTENTS Dispersal Types ............................................................................................................................................ 4-9-2 Wind Dispersal ............................................................................................................................................. 4-9-2 Splachnaceae ......................................................................................................................................... 4-9-4 Liverworts ............................................................................................................................................. 4-9-5 Invasive Species .................................................................................................................................... 4-9-5 Decay Dispersal............................................................................................................................................ 4-9-6 Animal Dispersal .......................................................................................................................................... 4-9-9 Earthworms ..........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Keys for the Determination of Families of Pleurocarpous Mosses of Africa
    Keys for the determination of families of pleurocarpous mosses of Africa E. Petit Extracted from: Cléfs pour la determination des familles et des genres des mousses pleurocarpes (Musci) d'AfriqueBull. Jard. Bot. Nat. Belg. 48: 135-181 (1978) Translated by M.J.Wigginton, 36 Big Green, Warmington, Peterborough, PE and C.R. Stevenson, 111 Wootton Road, King's Lynn, Norfolk, PE The identification of tropical African mosses is fraught with difficulty, not least because of the sparseness of recent taxonomic literature. Even the determination of specimens to family or genus can be problematical. The paper by Petit (1978) is a valiant attempt to provide workable keys (and short descriptions) to all the families and genera of African pleurocarpous mosses, and remains the only such comprehensive treatment. Whilst the shortcomings of any such keys apply, the keys have nonetheless proved to be of assistance in placing specimens in taxonomic groups. However, for the non-French reader, the use of the keys can be a tedious business, necessitating frequent recourse to dictionaries and grammars. Members of the BBS have made collections in a number of tropical African countries in recent years, including on the BBS expedition to Malawi and privately to Madagascar, Tanzania and Zaire. This provided the impetus for making a translation of Petit's keys. Neither of us is an expert linguist, and doubtless in places, some of the subtleties of the language have escaped us. A rather free translation has sometimes proved necessary in order to give the sense of the text. Magill's Glossarium Polyglottum Bryologicae has been valuable in assisting with technical terms.
    [Show full text]
  • Flora of New Zealand Mosses
    FLORA OF NEW ZEALAND MOSSES BRACHYTHECIACEAE A.J. FIFE Fascicle 46 – JUNE 2020 © Landcare Research New Zealand Limited 2020. Unless indicated otherwise for specific items, this copyright work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International licence Attribution if redistributing to the public without adaptation: "Source: Manaaki Whenua – Landcare Research" Attribution if making an adaptation or derivative work: "Sourced from Manaaki Whenua – Landcare Research" See Image Information for copyright and licence details for images. CATALOGUING IN PUBLICATION Fife, Allan J. (Allan James), 1951- Flora of New Zealand : mosses. Fascicle 46, Brachytheciaceae / Allan J. Fife. -- Lincoln, N.Z. : Manaaki Whenua Press, 2020. 1 online resource ISBN 978-0-947525-65-1 (pdf) ISBN 978-0-478-34747-0 (set) 1. Mosses -- New Zealand -- Identification. I. Title. II. Manaaki Whenua-Landcare Research New Zealand Ltd. UDC 582.345.16(931) DC 588.20993 DOI: 10.7931/w15y-gz43 This work should be cited as: Fife, A.J. 2020: Brachytheciaceae. In: Smissen, R.; Wilton, A.D. Flora of New Zealand – Mosses. Fascicle 46. Manaaki Whenua Press, Lincoln. http://dx.doi.org/10.7931/w15y-gz43 Date submitted: 9 May 2019 ; Date accepted: 15 Aug 2019 Cover image: Eurhynchium asperipes, habit with capsule, moist. Drawn by Rebecca Wagstaff from A.J. Fife 6828, CHR 449024. Contents Introduction..............................................................................................................................................1 Typification...............................................................................................................................................1
    [Show full text]
  • An Annotated Checklist of Tasmanian Mosses
    15 AN ANNOTATED CHECKLIST OF TASMANIAN MOSSES by P.I Dalton, R.D. Seppelt and A.M. Buchanan An annotated checklist of the Tasmanian mosses is presented to clarify the occurrence of taxa within the state. Some recently collected species, for which there are no published records, have been included. Doubtful records and excluded speciei. are listed separately. The Tasmanian moss flora as recognised here includes 361 species. Key Words: mosses, Tasmania. In BANKS, M.R. et al. (Eds), 1991 (3l:iii): ASPECTS OF TASMANIAN BOTANY -- A TR1BUn TO WINIFRED CURTIS. Roy. Soc. Tasm. Hobart: 15-32. INTRODUCTION in recent years previously unrecorded species have been found as well as several new taxa described. Tasmanian mosses received considerable attention We have assigned genera to families followi ng Crosby during the early botanical exploration of the antipodes. & Magill (1981 ), except where otherwise indicated in One of the earliest accounts was given by Wilson (1859), the case of more recent publications. The arrangement who provided a series of descriptions of the then-known of families, genera and species is in alphabetic order for species, accompanied by coloured illustrations, as ease of access. Taxa known to occur in Taslnania ami Part III of J.D. Hooker's Botany of the Antarctic its neighbouring islands only are listed; those for Voyage. Although there have been a number of papers subantarctic Macquarie Island (politically part of since that time, two significant compilations were Tasmania) are not treated and have been presented published about the tum of the century. The first was by elsewhere (Seppelt 1981).
    [Show full text]
  • Phylogeny of Neckeropsis and Himantocladium (Neckeraceae, Bryophytina)
    Bry. Div. Evo. 38 (2): 053–070 ISSN 2381-9677 (print edition) DIVERSITY & http://www.mapress.com/j/bde BRYOPHYTE EVOLUTION Copyright © 2016 Magnolia Press Article ISSN 2381-9685 (online edition) http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/bde.38.2.4 Phylogeny of Neckeropsis and Himantocladium (Neckeraceae, Bryophytina) SANNA OLSSON1,2*, JOHANNES ENROTH3*, SANNA HUTTUNEN4 & DIETMAR QUANDT5 1Department of Agricultural Sciences, University of Helsinki, P.O. Box 27, FI-00014 Helsinki, Finland 2INIA Forest Research Centre (INIA-CIFOR), Dept. Forest Ecology and Genetics, Carretera de A Coruña km 7.5, E-28040 Madrid, Spain 3Department of Biological and Environmental Sciences and Botanical Museum, University of Helsinki, P.O. Box 7, FI-00014 Helsinki, Finland 4Department of Biology, FI-20014 University of Turku, Finland 5Nees-Institute for Biodiversity of Plants, University of Bonn, Meckenheimer Allee 170, 53115 Bonn, Germany *Corresponding author: Sanna Olsson, e-mail: [email protected], tel.: +34634509635 or Johannes Enroth, e-mail: Johannes. [email protected], tel.:+3580294157792 Abstract Two closely related tropical genera from the pleurocarpous moss family Neckeraceae are revised: the second largest genus in the family, Neckeropsis, currently with 29 species, and Himantocladium, comprising six species. Twenty-one species of Neckeropsis and five of Himantocladium were included in this study, which is based on phylogenetic analyses using sequence level data from the plastid (rps4)-trnT-trnL-trnF cluster and rpl16 as well as nuclear ITS1 & 2. Neckeropsis ap- peared as polyphyletic. Neckeropsis s. str. comprises 12 species and a further four species, not included in the analysis, are tentatively retained in the genus based on morphology.
    [Show full text]
  • Systematics and Ecology of the Moss Genus Scleropodium (Brachytheciaceae)
    Systematics and ecology of the moss genus Scleropodium (Brachytheciaceae) By Benjamin Elias Carter A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Integrative Biology in the Graduate Division of the University of California, Berkeley Committee in charge: Professor Brent D. Mishler, Chair Professor Bruce G. Baldwin Professor Chelsea D. Specht Spring 2012 Abstract Systematics and ecology of the moss genus Scleropodium (Brachytheciaceae) By Benjamin Elias Carter Doctor of Philosophy in Integrative Biology University of California, Berkeley Professor Brent D. Mishler, Chair Scleropodium is a genus of six species in the Brachytheciaceae. Although they are common in north temperate zones, they have not received monographic treatment in over a century. The aims of this study were to test species circumscriptions within the genus with molecular data, complete a thorough global taxonomic treatment of the genus, and to quantitatively investigate the ecological preferences of the species. A molecular phylogenetic study was conducted using 104 individuals spanning the range of morphological variation and the geographic extent of the genus. Maximum Parsimony and Bayesian phylogenetic analyses and a statistical parsimony network analysis of ITS and the chloroplast rps4, bsbA2 and trnG regions were performed. Although slight differences were found among analyses, there were six clear molecular groups. Five of these corresponded directly to the species Scleropodium californicum, S. cespitans, S. julaceum, S. obtusifolium and S. touretii. The sixth species, S. occidentale, is new to science and is described here. It is similar in ecology and morphology to S. obtusifolium, but has several diagnostic features in both molecular markers and morphological characters.
    [Show full text]
  • A Molecular Phylogeny of Hypnales (Bryophyta) Inferred from ITS2 Sequence-Structure Data Benjamin Merget, Matthias Wolf*
    Merget and Wolf BMC Research Notes 2010, 3:320 http://www.biomedcentral.com/1756-0500/3/320 SHORT REPORT Open Access A molecular phylogeny of Hypnales (Bryophyta) inferred from ITS2 sequence-structure data Benjamin Merget, Matthias Wolf* Abstract Background: Hypnales comprise over 50% of all pleurocarpous mosses. They provide a young radiation complicating phylogenetic analyses. To resolve the hypnalean phylogeny, it is necessary to use a phylogenetic marker providing highly variable features to resolve species on the one hand and conserved features enabling a backbone analysis on the other. Therefore we used highly variable internal transcribed spacer 2 (ITS2) sequences and conserved secondary structures, as deposited with the ITS2 Database, simultaneously. Findings: We built an accurate and in parts robustly resolved large scale phylogeny for 1,634 currently available hypnalean ITS2 sequence-structure pairs. Conclusions: Profile Neighbor-Joining revealed a possible hypnalean backbone, indicating that most of the hypnalean taxa classified as different moss families are polyphyletic assemblages awaiting taxonomic changes. Background encompassing a total of 1,634 species in order to test Pleurocarpous mosses, which are mainly found in tropi- the hypothesis that the ITS2 sequence-structure can be cal forests, account for more than 50% of all moss spe- used to determine the phylogeny of Hypnales and to cies [1,2]. Brotherus in 1925 used morphological resolve especially its phylogenetic backbone. A rapid characters to partition the pleurocarpous into three radiation in the early history of pleurocarpous mosses orders. These were Leucodontales (= Isobryales), Hoo- has resulted in low molecular diversity generally, but keriales and Hypnobryales (= Hypnales) [3]. Later mole- particularly in the order Hypnales [5,7].
    [Show full text]
  • Endemic Genera of Bryophytes of North America (North of Mexico)
    Preslia, Praha, 76: 255–277, 2004 255 Endemic genera of bryophytes of North America (north of Mexico) Endemické rody mechorostů Severní Ameriky Wilfred Borden S c h o f i e l d Dedicated to the memory of Emil Hadač Department of Botany, University Boulevard 3529-6270, Vancouver B. C., Canada V6T 1Z4, e-mail: [email protected] Schofield W. B. (2004): Endemic genera of bryophytes of North America (north of Mexico). – Preslia, Praha, 76: 255–277. There are 20 endemic genera of mosses and three of liverworts in North America, north of Mexico. All are monotypic except Thelia, with three species. General ecology, reproduction, distribution and nomenclature are discussed for each genus. Distribution maps are provided. The Mexican as well as Neotropical genera of bryophytes are also noted without detailed discussion. K e y w o r d s : bryophytes, distribution, ecology, endemic, liverworts, mosses, reproduction, North America Introduction Endemism in bryophyte genera of North America (north of Mexico) appears not to have been discussed in detail previously. Only the mention of genera is included in Schofield (1980) with no detail presented. Distribution maps of several genera have appeared in scattered publications. The present paper provides distribution maps of all endemic bryophyte genera for the region and considers the biology and taxonomy of each. When compared to vascular plants, endemism in bryophyte genera in the region is low. There are 20 genera of mosses and three of liverworts. The moss families Andreaeobryaceae, Pseudoditrichaceae and Theliaceae and the liverwort family Gyrothyraceae are endemics; all are monotypic. A total of 16 families of mosses and three of liverworts that possess endemic genera are represented.
    [Show full text]
  • A Molecular Contribution for Understanding the Lembophyllaceae (Bryopsida) Based on Noncoding Chloroplast Regions (Cpdna) and It
    J. Hattori Bot. Lab. No. 89: 71- 92 (Dec. 2000) A MOLECULAR CONTRIBUTION FOR UNDERSTANDING THE LEMBOPHYLLACEAE (BRYOPSIDA) BASED ON NONCODING CHLOROPLAST REGIONS (CPDNA) AND ITS2 (NRDNA) SEQUENCE DATA STUDIES IN AUSTRAL TEMPERATE RAIN FOREST BRYOPHYTES 8 12 3 2 DIETMAR QUANDT ' , RAYMOND S. TANGNEY , JAN-PETER FRAHM 1 and WOLFGANG FREY ABSTRACT. So far morphological approaches have produced little consensus in formulating clear definitions of the mostly southern hemispheric Lembophyllaceae and Meteoriaceae, two pleurocar­ pous and mainly epiphytic moss families. The generic limits proposed by various authors have result­ ed in an overlap of family concepts, and the systematic position of genera such as Weymouthia and Pilotrichella has been unsettled since the description of these families by Brotherus ( 1907) and Kind­ berg ( 1897). A molecular approach based on sequence data of two non coding regions of the chloro­ plast DNA (cpDNA), trnLuAA intron and trnLuAA 3'exon- trnFGAA intergenic spacer (trn data) as well as sequence data of the internal transcribed spacer 2 (ITS2) of the nuclear ribosomal DNA (nrDNA) provides new evidence supporting the transfer of the genus Weymouthia into the Lembophyllaceae. Although the inter- and intrageneric sequence divergence is extremely low, the highly congruent maximally parsimonious trees from trn and ITS2 data sets suggest a close relationship of the Lembo­ phyllaceae taxa sensu Tangney ( 1997 b ). The Lembophyllaceae as treated here contain five genera Camptochaete, Lembophyllum, Fifea, Fallaciella and Weymouthia . Within the Meteoriaceae Meteori­ um and Papillaria are retained as separate genera, while Weymouthia is excluded from the Meteori­ aceae and transferred to the Lembophyllaceae. The molecular data does not align Pilotrichella with either the Meteoriaceae or the Lembophyllaceae sampled.
    [Show full text]
  • Spoon-Leaved Moss, Bryoandersonia Illecebra Ecosystem Scientific Name Element ID Elcode
    COSEWIC Assessment and Status Report on the Spoon-leaved Moss Bryoandersonia illecebra in Canada THREATENED 2017 COSEWIC status reports are working documents used in assigning the status of wildlife species suspected of being at risk. This report may be cited as follows: COSEWIC. 2017. COSEWIC assessment and status report on the Spoon-leaved Moss Bryoandersonia illecebra in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. xi + 40 pp. (http://www.registrelep-sararegistry.gc.ca/default.asp?lang=en&n=24F7211B-1). Previous report(s): COSEWIC 2003. COSEWIC assessment and status report on the spoon-leaved moss Bryoandersonia illecebra in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. vi + 31 pp. Doubt, J 2003. COSEWIC status report on the spoon-leaved moss Bryoandersonia illecebra in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. 1-31 pp. Production note: COSEWIC would like to acknowledge Dr. Jennifer Doubt for writing the status report on the Spoon-leaved Moss (Bryoandersonia illecebra) in Canada, prepared under contract with Environment and Climate Change Canada. This status report was overseen and edited by Dr. René Belland, Co-chair of the COSEWIC Mosses and Lichens Specialist Subcommittee. For additional copies contact: COSEWIC Secretariat c/o Canadian Wildlife Service Environment and Climate Change Canada Ottawa, ON K1A 0H3 Tel.: 819-938-4125 Fax: 819-938-3984 E-mail: [email protected] http://www.cosewic.gc.ca Également disponible en français sous le titre Ếvaluation et Rapport de situation du COSEPAC sur L’andersonie charmante (Bryoandersonia illecebra) au Canada.
    [Show full text]