Creat membership Creat membership
Sign in

Forgot password?

Confirm
  • Forgot password?
    Sign Up
  • Confirm
    Sign In
Creat membership Creat membership
Sign in

Forgot password?

Confirm
  • Forgot password?
    Sign Up
  • Confirm
    Sign In
Collection
For ¥0.57 per day, unlimited downloads CREATE MEMBERSHIP Download

toTop

If you have any feedback, Please follow the official account to submit feedback.

Turn on your phone and scan

home > search >

An expanded phylogeny of Cuphea (Lythraceae) and a North American monophyly

Journal:
Plant Systematics and Evolution


Issue Date:
2010


Abstract(summary):

A phylogenetic analysis of the New World genus Cuphea was conducted employing sequences from the nuclear rDNA internal transcribed spacer (ITS) and chloroplast trnL-trnF spacer and rpl16 intron. The analysis expands the number of Cuphea species from 53 in an earlier ITS study to 70 and adds two chloroplast data sets in order to generate a more complete and robust phylogeny and to test a previous result that suggested the presence of a large North American clade. Results reaffirm the monophyly of Cuphea with Pleurophora as the sister genus and recover a basal divergence event that mirrors the two subgenera of the current classification. Phylogenies of the two chloroplast regions are largely unresolved beyond the initial dichotomy and some resolution at the terminal and subterminal nodes. Based on the ITS phylogeny, five major clades are recognized. Subgenus Cuphea (Clade 1), defined morphologically by the synapomorphic loss of bracteoles, is sister to the much larger subg. Bracteolatae (Clades 2-5). Clades 2-4, comprising the South American and Caribbean species, grade successively to Clade 5, an exclusively North American lineage of 29 species. Among the 12 sections included in the study, only section Trispermum, a subclade of Clade 4, is monophyletic. Section Pseudocircaea is nested within Clade 3, which is largely equivalent to section Euandra. The North American endemic clade includes four sections, of which none are recovered as monophyletic in this study.


Page:
35---44


VIEW PDF

The preview is over

If you wish to continue, please create your membership or download this.

Create Membership

Similar Literature

Submit Feedback

This function is a member function, members do not limit the number of downloads