Combined and separate analyses of morphological and molecular data in the plant family Rubiaceae

Cladistics

Volumn 12, Issue 1, 1996, Pages 21-40

  Bremer, Birgitta ^a  

^a UPPSALA UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CINCHONOIDEAE; IXOROIDEAE; MAGNOLIOPHYTA; RUBIACEAE; VANGUERIEAE;

EID: 0002422986     PISSN: 07483007     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1006/clad.1996.0003     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. BARRETT, M., M. J. DONOGHUE, AND E. SOBER. 1991. Against consensus. Syst. Zool. 40: 486-493.
2. BARRETT, M., M. J. DONOGHUE, AND E. SOBER. 1993. Crusade? A reply to Nelson. Syst. Biol. 42: 216-217.
3. BREMEKAMP, C. E. B. 1954. Les sous-familles et les tribus des Rubiaées. Huitème congrès international de botanique, rapports et communications. Sec. 2-6 Paris.
4. BREMEKAMP, C. E. B. 1966. Remarks on the position, the delimitation and the subdivision of the Rubiaceae. Acta Bot. Neerl. 15: 1-33.
5. BREMER, B. 1979. The genus Neurocalyx (Rubiaceae-Argostemmaterae) in Ceylon. Bot. Not. 132: 399-407.
6. BREMER, B. 1992. Phylogeny of the Rubiaeae (Chiococceae) based on molecular and morphological data - useful approaches for classification and comparative ecology. Ann. MO. Bot. Gard. 79: 380-387.
7. BREMER, B. K., ANDREASEN, AND D. OLSSON. 1995. Subfamilial and tribal relationships in the Rubiaceae based on rbcL sequence data. Ann. MO. Bot. Gard. 82: 383-397.
8. BREMER, B. AND R. K. JANSEN. 1991. Comparative restriction site mapping of the chloroplast DNA implies new phylogenetic relationships within the Rubiaceae. Am. J. Bot. 78: 198-213.
9. BREMER, B. AND L. STRUWE. 1992. Phylogeny of the Rubiaceae and the Loganiaceae: congruence or conflict between morphological and molecular data? Am. J. Bot. 79: 1171-1184.
10. BREMER, K. 1988. The limits of amino acid sequence data in angiosperm phylogenetic reconstruction. Evolution 42: 795-803.
11. BREMER, K. 1995. Branch support and tree stability. Cladistics 10: 295-304.
12. BULL, J. J., J. P. HUELSENBECK, C. W. CUNNINGHAM, D. L. SWOFFORD, AND P. J. WADDELL. 1993. Partitioning and combining data in phylogenetic analysis. Syst. Biol. 42: 384-397.
13. CARNAP, R. 1950. Logical Foundations of Probability. Univ. Chicago Press, Chicago.
14. CHASE, M. W. ET AL. 1993. Phylogenetics of seed plants: an analysis of nucleotide sequences from the plastid gene rbcL. Ann. MO. Bot. Gard. 80: 528-581.
15. CHENERY, E. M. 1948. Aluminium in the plant world. Kew Bull. 1948: 173-183.
16. DE QUEIROZ, A. 1993. For consensus (sometimes). Syst. Biol. 42: 368-372.
17. ERNISSE, D. J. AND A. G. KLUGE. 1993. Taxonomic congruence versus total evidence, and amniote phylogeny inferred from fossils, molecules, and morphology. Mol. Biol. Evol. 10: 1170-1195.
18. FAGERLIND, F. 1937. Embryologische, zytologische and bestäubungsexperimentelle Studien in der Familien Rubiaceae nebst Bemerkunen über einige Polyploiditätsprobleme. Acta Horti Bergiani 11: 195-470.
19. FARRIS, J. S. 1973. On comparing the shapes of taxonomic trees. Syst. Zool. 22: 50-54.
20. FARRIS, J. S. 1983. The logical basis of phylogenetic analysis. In: N. I. Platnick and V. A. Funk (eds). Advances in Cladistics. Vol. 2. Colombia Univ. Press, New York, pp. 1-35.
21. FELSENSTEIN, J. 1985. Confidence limits on phylogenetics: an approach using the bootstrap. Evolution 39: 783-791.
22. HEMPEL, C. G. 1965. Aspects of Scientific Explanation and Other Essays in Philosophy of Science. Free Press, New York.
23. HENNIG, W. 1966. Phylogenetic Systematics. Univ. Illinois Press, Urbana.
24. HILLIS, D. M. 1987. Molecular versus morphological approaches to systematics. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 18: 23-42.
25. HILLIS, D. M. AND J. J. BULL. 1993. An empirical test of bootstrapping as a method for assessing confidence in phylogenetic analysis. Syst. Biol. 42: 182-192.
26. IMBERT, F. M. AND J. H. RICHARDS. 1993. Protandry, incompatibility, and secondary pollen presentation in Cephalanthus occidentalis (Rubiaceae). Am. J. Bot. 80: 395-404.
27. KALLERSJÖ, M., J. S. FARRIS, A. G. KLUGE, AND C. BULT. 1992. Skewness and permutation. Cladistics 8: 275-287.
28. KIEHN, M. 1985. Karyosystematische Untersuchungen an Rubiaceae: Chromosomenzählungen aus Afrika, Madagaskar und Mauritius. Plant Syst. Evol. 149: 89-118.
29. KIEHN, M. 1985. Karyosystematic studies on Rubiaceae: Chromosome counts from Sri Lanka. Plant Syst. Evol. 154: 213-223.
30. KLUGE, A. G. 1989. A concern for evidence and a phylogenetic hypothesis of relationships among Epicrates (Boidae, Serpentes). Syst. Zool. 38: 7-25.
31. KLUGE, A. G. AND A. J. WOLF. 1993. Cladistics: what's in a word? Cladistics 9: 183-199.
32. KOOIMAN, P. 1969. The occurrence of Asperulosidic glycosides in the Rubiaceae. Acta Bot. Neerl. 18: 124-137.
33. LEPPIK, E. E. 1956. The form and function of natural patterns in flowers. Am. J. Bot. 43: 445-455.
34. LEPPIK, E. E. 1977. Calyx-borne semaphylls in tropical Rubiaeae. Phytomorphology 27: 161-168.
35. MICKEVICH, M. F. AND M. S. JOHNSON. 1976. Congruence between morphological and allozyme data in evolutionary inference and character evolution. Syst. Zool. 25: 260-270.
36. MIYAMOTO, M. M. 1983. Frogs of the Eleuterodactylus rugulosus group: a cladistic study of allozyme, morphological, and karyological data. Syst. Zool. 32: 109-124.
37. MIYAMOTO, M. M. 1984. Central American frogs allied to Eleuterodactylus cruentus: Allozyme and morphological data. J. Herpetol. 18: 256-263.
38. MIYAMOTO, M. M. 1985. Consensus cladograms and general classification. Cladistics 1: 186-189.
39. MIYAMOTO, M. M., J. L. SLIGHTOM, AND M. GOODMAN. 1987. Phylogenetic relationships of humans and African apes from DNA sequences in the yh-globin region. Science (Wash. DC) 238: 369-373.
40. NELSON, G. 1979. Cladistic analysis and synthesis: principles and definitions, with a historical note on Adanson's "Familles des plantes (1763-1764)". Syst. Zool. 28: 1-21.
41. NELSON, G. 1993. Why crusade against consensus? A reply to Barrett, Donoghue, and Sober. Syst. Biol. 42: 215-216.
42. NELSON, G. AND N. PLATNICK. 1981. Systematics and biogeography: Cladistics and Vicariance. Columbia Univ. Press, New York.
43. NILSSON, L. A., E. RABAKONANDRIANIA, B. PETTERSSON, AND J. RANAIVO. 1990. "Ixoroid" secondary pollen presentation and pollination by small moths in the Malagasy treelet Ixorapla-tythyrsa. Plant Syst. Evol. 170: 161-175.
44. PATTERSON, C. 1987. Molecules and Morphology in Evolution: Conflict or Compromise. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge.
45. ROBBRECHT, E. 1988. Tropical woody Rubiaceae. Opera Bot. Belg. 1: 1-271.
46. ROBBRECHT, E. 1993a. Introduction to advances in Rubiaceae macrosystematics. Opera Bot. Belg. 6: 7-18.
47. ROBBRECHT, E. 1993b. Supplement to the 1988 outline of the classification of the Rubiaceae Index to genera. Opera Bot. Belg. 6: 173-196.
48. SANDERSON, M. J. 1989. Confidence limits on phylogenies: the bootstrap revisited. Cladistics 5: 113-129.
49. SCHUMANN, K. 1891. Rubiaceae. In: A Engler and K. Prantl (eds). Die naturlichen Pflanzenfamilien Vol. 4 (4). Wilhelm Engelmann, Leipzig, pp. 1-156.
50. SWOFFORD, D. L. 1991. When are phylogeny estimates from molecular and morphological data incongruent? In: M. M. Miyamoto and J. Cracraft (eds). Phylogenetic analysis for DNA sequences. Oxford Univ. Press, New York, pp. 295-333.
51. SWOFFORD, D. L. 1993. PAUP - Phylogenetic Analysis Using Parsimony. Version 3.1.1. Illinois Natural History Survey, Champaign, Illinois.
52. SYTSMA, K. J. 1990. DNA and morphology: Influence of plant phylogeny. Trends Ecol. & Evol. 5: 104-110.
53. VERDCOURT, B. 1958. Remarks on the classification of the Rubiaceae. Bull. Jard. Bot. Etat. Brux. 28: 209-281.
54. WOESE, C. R. 1987. Bacterial evolution. Microbiol. Rev. 51: 221-271.