Urticalean rosids: Circumscription, rosid ancestry, and phylogenetics based on rbcL, trnL-F, and ndhF sequences

American Journal of Botany

Volumn 89, Issue 9, 2002, Pages 1531-1546

  Sytsma, Kenneth J ^a   Morawetz, Jeffery ^a,c   Chris Pires, J ^a   Nepokroeff, Molly ^a,d   Conti, Elena ^a,e   Zjhra, Michelle ^a,f   Hall, Jocelyn C ^a   Chase, Mark W ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MADISON   (United States)

^b ROYAL BOTANIC GARDENS   (United Kingdom)

^c OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d W O Farber Center for Civic Leadership   (United States)

^e UNIVERSITY OF ZURICH   (Switzerland)

^f Keene College   (United States)

Author keywords

Cannabaceae; Cecropiaceae; ndhF; Phylogenetics; rbcL; Rosales; trnL F; Urticales

Indexed keywords

PHYLOGENY;

BARBEYACEAE; CANNABACEAE; DIRACHMACEAE; ELAEAGNACEAE; EMBRYOPHYTA; MAGNOLIOPHYTA; MORACEAE; POIKILOSPERMUM; RHAMNACEAE; ROSACEAE; ROSALES; ROSIDS; ULMACEAE; URTICACEAE; URTICALES;

EID: 0036741208     PISSN: 00029122     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3732/ajb.89.9.1531     Document Type: Article

References (108)

1. ALVERSON, W. S., B. A. WHITLOCK, R. NYFFELER, C. BAYER, AND D. A. BAUM. 1999. Phylogeny of the core Malvales: evidence from ndhF sequence data. American Journal of Botany 86: 1474-1486.
2. APG (ANGIOSPERM PHYLOGENY GROUP). 1998. An ordinal classification for the families of flowering plants. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 85: 531-553.
3. BAUM, D. A., K. J. SYTSMA, AND P. C. HOCH. 1994. The phylogeny of Epilobium L. (Onagraceae) based on nuclear ribosomal ITS sequences. Systematic Botany 19: 363-388.
4. BECHTEL, A. R. 1921. The floral anatomy of the Urticales. American Journal of Botany 8: 386-407.
5. BEHNKE, H.-D. 1973. Sieve-tube plastids of Hamamelididae. Electron microscopic investigations with special reference to Urticales. Taxon 22: 205-210.
6. BEHNKE, H.-D. 1989. Sieve-element plastids, phloem proteins, and the evolution of flowering plants. IV. Hamamelidae. In P. R. Crane and S. Blackmore [eds.], Evolution, systematics, and fossil history of the Hamamelidae, vol. 2, higher Hamamelidae, 105-128. Clarendon Press, Oxford, UK.
7. BERG, C. C. 1977. Urticales, their differentiation and systematic position. Plant Systematics and Evolution, supplement 1: 349-374.
8. BERG, C. C. 1978. Cecropiaceae a new family of the Urticales. Taxon 27: 39-44.
9. BERG, C. C. 1989. Systematics and phylogeny of the Urticales. In P. R. Crane and S. Blackmore [eds.], Evolution, systematics, and fossil history of the Hamamelidae, vol. 2, higher Hamamelidae, 193-220. Clarendon Press, Oxford, UK.
10. BERG, C. C., R. W. A. P. AKKERMANS, AND E. C. H. VAN HEUSDEN. 1990. Cecropiaceae: Coussapoa and Pouroama, with an introduction to the family. Flora Neotropica 51: 1-208.
11. BOESEWINKEL, F. D., AND F. BOUMAN. 1997. Ovules and seeds of Dirachma socotrana (Dirachmaceae). Plant Systematics and Evolution 205: 195-204.
12. BONSEN, K., AND B. J. H. TER WELLE. 1983. Comparative wood and leaf anatomy of the Cecropiaceae (Urticales). Bulletin du Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle, 4th series, 5 section B, no. 2: 151-177.
13. BONSEN, K., AND B. J. H. TER WELLE. 1984. Systematic wood anatomy and affinities of the Urticaceae. Botanische Jahrbücher für Systematik. 105: 49-71.
14. BOUMAN, F., AND F. D. BOESEWINKEL. 1997. Ovules and seeds of Barbeya with additional arguments for an urticalean affinity of the Barbeyaceae. Acta Botanica Neerlandica 46: 255-261.
15. BREMER, K. 1988. The limits of amino acid sequence data in angiosperm phylogenetic reconstructions. Evolution 42: 795-803.
16. BULT, C., M. KÄLLERSJO, AND Y. SUH. 1992. Amplification and sequencing of 16S/18S rDNA from gel-purified total plant DNA. Plant Molecular Biology Reporter 10: 272-284.
17. CHASE, M. W., ET AL. 1993. Phylogenetics of seed plants: an analysis of nucleotide sequences from the plastid gene rbcL. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 80: 528-580.
18. CHEN, Z. D., X. Q. WANG, H. Y. SUN, AND Y. HAN. 1998. Systematic position of the Rhoipteleaceae: evidence from rbcL sequences. Zhiwu Fenlei Xuebao 36: 1-5.
19. COLLINSON, M. E. 1989. The fossil history of the Moraceae, Urticaceae (including Cecropiaceae), and Cannabaceae. In P. R. Crane and S. Blackmore [eds.], Evolution, systematics, and fossil history of the Hamamelidae, vol. 2, higher Hamamelidae, 319-339. Clarendon Press, Oxford, UK.
20. CONTI, E., A. FISCHBACH, AND K. J. SYTSMA. 1993. Tribal relationships in the Onagraceae using rbcL sequence data. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 80: 672-685.
21. CONTI, E., A. LITT, AND K. J. SYTSMA. 1996. Circumscription of Myrtales and their relationships to other rosids: evidence from rbcL sequence data. American Journal of Botany 83: 221-233.
22. CONTI, E., A. LITT, P. G. WILSON, S. A. GRAHAM, B. G. BRIGGS, L. A. S. JOHNSON, AND K. J. SYTSMA. 1997. Interfamilial relationships in Myrtales: molecular phylogeny and patterns of morphological evolution. Systematic Botany 22: 629-647.
23. CRONQUIST, A. 1981. An integrated system of classification of flowering plants. Columbia University Press, New York, New York, USA.
24. CRONQUIST, A. 1988. The evolution and classification of flowering plants, 2nd ed. New York Botanical Garden, Bronx, New York, USA.
25. DAHLGREN, G. 1989. The last Dahlgrenogram, system of classification of the dicotyledons. In K. Tan [ed.], Plant taxonomy, phytogeography and related subjects, 249-260. Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh, Scotland.
26. DAHLGREN, G. 1991. Steps toward a natural system of the dicotyledons: embryological characters. Aliso 13: 107-165.
27. DAHLGREN, R. 1980. A revised system of classification of the angiosperms. Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society 80: 91-124.
28. DAHLGREN, R. 1983. General aspects of angiosperm evolution and macrosystematics. Nordic Journal of Botany 3: 119-149.
29. DICKISON, W. C., AND E. M. SWEITZER. 1970. The morphology and relationships of Barbeya oleoides. American Journal of Botany 57: 468-476.
30. ENGLER, H. G. A. 1889. Ulmaceae, Moraceae and Urticaceae. In A. Engler and K. Prantl [eds.], Die natürlichen pflanzenfamilien 3(1), 59-118. W. Engelmann, Leipzig, Germany.
31. FELSENSTEIN, J. 1985. Confidence limits on phylogenies: an approach using the bootstrap. Evolution 39: 783-791.
32. FITCH, W. M. 1971. Toward defining the course of evolution: minimum change for a specific tree topology. Systematic Zoology 20: 406-416.
33. FRIIS, I. 1989. The Urticaceae: a systematic review. In P. R. Crane and S. Blackmore [eds.], Evolution, systematics, and fossil history of the Hamamelidae, vol. 2, higher Hamamelidae, 285-308. Clarendon Press, Oxford, UK.
34. FRIIS, I. 1993. Urticaceae. In K. Kubitzki, J. G. Rohwer, and V. Bittrich [eds.], The families and genera of vascular plants. II. Flowering plants. Dicotyledons. Magnoliid, Hamamelid and Caryophyllid families, 612-630. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany.
35. GIANNASI, D. E. 1978. Generic relationships in the Ulmaceae based on flavonoid chemistry. Taxon 27: 331-344.
36. GIANNASI, D. E. 1986. Phytochemical aspects of phylogeny in Hamamelidae. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 73: 417-437.
37. GIVNISH, T. J., T. M. EVANS, M. L. ZJHRA, P. E. BERRY, AND K. J. SYTSMA. 2000. Molecular evolution, adaptive radiation, and geographic diversification in the amphiatlantic family Rapateaceae: evidence from ndhF sequence data. Evolution 54: 1915-1937.
38. GRUDZINSKAYA, I. A. 1967. Ulmaceae and reasons for distinguishing Celtidoideae as a separate family Celtidaceae Link. Botanicheskii Zhurnal 52: 1723-1749.
39. GUNTER, L. E., G. KOCHERT, AND D. E. GIANNASI. 1994. Phylogenetic relationships of the Juglandaceae. Plant Systematics and Evolution 192: 11-29.
40. HALLIER, H. 1905. Provisional scheme of the natural (phylogenetic) system of flowering plants. New Phytologist 4: 151-162.
41. HERRE, E. A., C. A. MACHADO, E. BERMINGHAM, J. D. NASON, D. M. WINDSOR, S. S. MCCAFFERTY, W. V. HOUTEN, AND K. BRACHMANN. 1996. Molecular phylogenies of figs and their pollinator wasps. Journal of Biogeography 23: 521-530.
42. HUMPHRIES, C. J., AND S. BLACKMORE. 1989. A review of the classification of the Moraceae. In P. R. Crane and S. Blackmore [eds.], Evolution, systematics, and fossil history of the Hamamelidae, vol. 2, higher Hamamelidae, 267-277. Clarendon Press, Oxford, UK.
43. JUDD, W. S., C. S. CAMPBELL, E. A. KELLOGG, AND P. F. STEVENS. 1999. Plant systematics: a phylogenetic approach. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Massachusetts, USA.
44. JUDD, W. S., R. W. SANDERS, AND M. J. DONOGHUE. 1994. Angiosperm family pairs: preliminary phylogenetic analyses. Harvard Papers in Botany 5: 1-51.
45. KIM, K.-J., AND R. K. JANSEN. 1995. ndhF sequence evolution and the major clades in the sunflower family. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 92: 10379-10383.
46. KUBITZKI, K. 1993a. Cannabaceae. In K. Kubitzki, J. G Rohwer, and V. Bittrich [eds.], The families and genera of vascular plants. II. Flowering plants. Dicotyledons. Magnoliid, Hamamelid and Caryophyllid families, 204-206. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany.
47. KUBITZKI, K. 1993b. Cecropiaceae. In K. Kubitzki, J. G. Rohwer, and V. Bittrich [eds.], The families and genera of vascular plants. II. Flowering plants. Dicotyledons. Magnoliid, Hamamelid and Caryophyllid families, 243-246. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany.
48. KUPRIANOVA, L. A. 1962. Palynological data for the systematics of the orders Fagales and Urticales. [Translated from Russian.] Proceedings of the First International Conference on Palynology 1962, Tucson, Arizona, USA: 17-25.
49. LINDLEY, J. 1853. The vegetable kingdom, 3rd ed. Bradbury and Evans, London, UK.
50. MADDISON, D. R. 1991. The discovery and importance of multiple islands of most-parsimonious trees. Systematic Zoology 40: 315-328.
51. MADDISON, W. P., M. J. DONOGHUE, AND D. R. MADDISON. 1984. Outgroup analysis and parsimony. Systematic Zoology 33: 83-103.
52. MADDISON, W. P., AND D. R. MADDISON. 1992. MacClade v. 3.05: analysis of phylogeny and character evolution. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Massachusetts, USA.
53. MANCHESTER, S. R. 1989a. Attached reproductive and vegetative remains of the extinct American-European genus Cedrelospermum (Ulmaceae) from the early Tertiary of Utah and Colorado. American Journal of Botany 76: 256-276.
54. MANCHESTER, S. R. 1989b. Systematics and fossil history of the Ulmaceae. In P. R. Crane and S. Blackmore [eds.], Evolution, systematics, and fossil history of the Hamamelidae, vol. 2, higher Hamamelidae, 221-251. Clarendon Press, Oxford, UK.
55. MEHRA, P. N., AND R. S. GILL. 1974. Cytological studies in Ulmaceae, Moraceae and Urticaceae. Journal of the Arnold Arboretum 55: 663-677.
56. METCALFE, C. R. 1966. Distribution of latex in the plant kingdom. Notes from the Jodrell Laboratory 3: 1-18.
57. NANDI, O. I., M. W. CHASE, AND P. K. ENDRESS. 1998. A combined cladistic analysis of angiosperms using rbcL and non-molecular data sets. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 85: 137-212.
58. OGINUMA, K., P. H. RAVEN, AND H. TOBE. 1990. Karyomorphology and relationships of Celtidaceae and Ulmaceae (Urticales). Botanical Magazine, Tokyo 103: 113-131.
59. OLMSTEAD, R. G., J. A. SWEERE, AND K. H. WOLFE. 1993. Ninety extra nucleotides in the ndhF gene of tobacco chloroplast DNA: a summary of revisions to the 1986 genome sequence. Plant Molecular Biology 22: 1191-1193.
60. OMORI, Y., AND S. TERABAYASHI. 1993. Gynoecial vascular anatomy and its systematic implications in Celtidaceae and Ulmaceae (Urticales). Journal of Plant Research 106: 249-258.
61. PAGEL, M. 1994. Detecting correlated evolution on phylogenies: a general method for the comparative analysis of discrete characters. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, B: 255: 37-45.
62. PAGEL, M. 1999. The maximum likelihood approach to reconstructing ancestral character states of discrete characters on phylogenies. Systematic Biology 48: 612-622.
63. QIU, Y.-L., M. W. CHASE, S. B. HOOT, E. CONTI, P. R. CRANE, K. J. SYTSMA. AND C. R. PARKS. 1998. Phylogenetics of the Hamamelidae and their allies: parsimony analyses of nucleotide sequences of the plastid gene rbcL. International Journal of Plant Sciences 159: 891-905.
64. RAMBAUT, A. 2001. Sequence alignment editor, v. 2.0a6. http://evolve.zoo.ox.ac.uk/.
65. RAVEN, P. H., AND D. I. AXELROD. 1974. Angiosperm biogeography and past continental movements. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 61: 539-673.
66. RICHARDSON, J. E., M. F. FAY, Q. C. B. CRONK, D. BOWMAN, AND M. W. CHASE. 2000. A phylogenetic analysis of Rhamnaceae using rbcL and trnL-F plastid DNA sequences. American Journal of Botany 87: 1309-1324.
67. ROHWER, J. G. 1993. Moraceae. In K. Kubitzki, J. G. Rohwer, and V. Bittrich [eds.], The families and genera of vascular plants. II. Flowering plants. Dicotyledons. Magnoliid, Hamamelid and Caryophyllid families, 438-453. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany.
68. SAVOLAINEN, V., M. W. CHASE, S. B. HOOT, C. M. MORTON, D. E. SOLTIS, C. BAYER, M. F. FAY, A. Y. DE BRUIJN, S. SULLIVAN, AND Y.-L. QIU. 2000a. Phylogenetics of flowering plants based on combined analysis of plastid atpB and rbcL gene sequences. Systematic Biology 49: 306-362.
69. SAVOLAINEN, V., ET AL. 2000b. Phylogeny of the eudicots: a nearly complete familial analysis based on rbcL gene sequences. Kew Bulletin 55: 257-309.
70. SETOGUCHI, H., H. TOBE, H. OHBA, AND M. OKAZAKI. 1993. Silicon-accumulating idioblasts in leaves of Cecropiaceae (Urticales). Journal of Plant Research 106: 327-335.
71. SMITH, J. F., K. J. SYTSMA, J. S. SHOEMAKER, AND R. L. SMITH. 1991. A qualitative comparison of total cellular DNA extraction protocols. Phytochemical Bulletin 23: 2-9.
72. SOLTIS, D. E., P. S. SOLTIS, M. E. MORT, M. W. CHASE, V. SAVOLAINEN, S. B. HOOT, AND C. M. MORTON. 1998. Inferring complex phylogenies using parsimony: an empirical approach using three large DNA data sets for angiosperms. Systematic Biology 47: 32-42.
73. SOLTIS, D. E., ET AL. 1997. Angiosperm phylogeny inferred from 18S ribosomal DNA sequences. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 84: 1-49.
74. SOLTIS, D. E., ET AL. 2000. Angiosperm phylogeny inferred from 18S rDNA, rbcL, and atpB sequences. Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society 133: 381-461.
75. SOLTIS, P. S., D. E. SOLTIS, AND M. W. CHASE. 1999. Angiosperm phylogeny inferred from multiple genes as a tool for comparative biology. Nature 402: 402-404.
76. SONG, B.-H., X.-Q. WANG, F.-Z. LI, AND D.-Y. HONG. 2001. Further evidence for paraphyly of the Celtidaceae from the chloroplast gene matK. Plant Systematics and Evolution 228: 107-115.
77. STEVENS, P. F. 2001. Angiosperm phylogeny website, v. 2, August 2001. http://www.mobot.org/MOBOT/research/APweb/.
78. SWEITZER, E. M. 1971. Comparative anatomy of Ulmaceae. Journal of the Arnold Arboretum 52: 523-585.
79. SWOFFORD, D. L. 1993. PAUP: phylogenetic analysis using parsimony, v. 3.1.1. Illinois Natural History Survey, Champaign, Illinois, USA.
80. SWOFFORD, D. L. 2000. PAUP*: phylogenetic analysis using parsimony (*and other methods), v. 4. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Massachusetts, USA.
81. SYTSMA, K. J. 1994. DNA extraction from recalcitrant plants: long, pure, and simple? In R. P. Adams, J. S. Miller, E. M. Golenberg, and J. E. Adams [eds.], Conservation of plant genes 11: intellectual property rights and DNA utilization, 69-81. Missouri Botanical Garden, St. Louis, Missouri, USA.
82. TABERLET, P., L. GIELLY, G. PAUTOU, AND J. BOUVET. 1991. Universal primers for amplification of three non-coding regions of chloroplast DNA. Plant Molecular Biology 17: 1105-1109.
83. TAKAHASHI, M. 1989. Pollen morphology of Celtidaceae and Ulmaceae: a reinvestigation. In P. R. Crane and S. Blackmore [eds.], Evolution, systematics, and fossil history of the Hamamelidae, vol 2, higher Hamamelidae, 253-265. Clarendon Press, Oxford, UK.
84. TAKASO, T. 1987. Ovule ontogeny and morphology in Ulmaceae (Abstract of the XIV International Botanical Congress, Berlin (West), Germany.
85. TAKASO, T., AND H. TOBE. 1990. Seed coat morphology and evolution in Celtidaceae and Ulmaceae (Urticales). Botanical Magazine, Tokyo 103: 25-41.
86. TAKHTAJAN, A. 1969. Flowering plants. Origin and dispersal. Oliver and Boyd, Edinburgh, Scotland.
87. TAKHTAJAN, A. 1997. Diversity and classification of flowering plants. Columbia University Press, New York, New York, USA.
88. TEMPLETON, A. R. 1983. Phylogenetic inferences from restriction endonucleases cleavage site maps with particular reference to the evolution of humans and apes. Evolution 37: 221-244.
89. TERABAYASHI, S. 1991. Vernation patterns in Celtidaceae and Ulmaceae (Urticales), and their evolutionary and systematic implications. Botanical Magazine, Tokyo 104: 1-13.
90. THORNE, R. F. 1968. Synopsis of a putatively phylogenetic classification of the flowering plants. Aliso 6: 75-76.
91. THORNE, R. F. 1973. The Amentiferae or Hamamelidae as an artificial group: a summary statement. Brittonia 25: 395-405.
92. THORNE, R. F. 1983. Proposed new realignments in the angiosperms. Nordic Journal of Botany 3: 85-117.
93. THORNE, R. F. 1992. An updated phylogenetic classification of the flowering plants. Aliso 13: 365-389.
94. THULIN, M., B. BREMER, J. RICHARDSON, J. NIKLASSON, M. F. FAY, AND M. W. CHASE. 1998. Family relationships of the enigmatic rosid genera Barbeya and Dirachma from the Horn of Africa region. Plant Systematics and Evolution 213: 103-119.
95. TIFFNEY, B. H. 1986. Fruit and seed dispersal and the evolution of the Hamamelidae. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 73: 394-416.
96. TIPPO, O. 1938. Comparative anatomy of the Moraceae and their presumed allies. Botanical Gazette 100: 1-99.
97. TOBE, H., AND M. TAKAHASHI. 1990. Trichome and pollen morphology of Barbeya (Barbeyaceae) and its relationships. Taxon 39: 561-567.
98. TOBE, H., AND T. TAKASO. 1996. Trichome micromorphology in Celtidaceae and Ulmaceae (Urticales). Acta Phytotaxonomica et Geobotanica 47: 153-168.
99. TODZIA, C. A. 1993. Ulmaceae. In K. Kubitzki, J. G. Rohwer, and V. Bittrich [eds.], The families and genera of vascular plants. II. Flowering plants. Dicotyledons. Magnoliid, Hamamelid and Caryophyllid families, 603-611. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany.
100. UEDA, K., K. KOSUGE, AND H. TOBE. 1997. A molecular phylogeny of Celtidaceae and Ulmaceae (Urticales) based on rbcL nucleotide sequences. Journal of Plant Research 110: 171-178.
101. WALKER, J. W., AND J. A. DOYLE. 1975. The bases of angiosperm phylogeny: palynology. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 62: 664-723.
102. WEIBLEN, G. D. 2000. Phylogenetic relationships of functionally dioecious Ficus (Moraceae) based on ribosomal DNA sequence variation and morphology. American Journal of Botany 87: 1342-1357.
103. WIEGREFE, S. J., K. J. SYTSMA, AND R. P. GURIES. 1994. Phylogeny of elms (Ulmus, Ulmaceae): molecular evidence for a sectional classification. Systematic Botany 19: 590-612.
104. WIEGREFE, S. J., K. J. SYTSMA, AND R. P. GURIES. 1998. The Ulmaceae, one family or two? Evidence from chloroplast DNA restriction site mapping. Plant Systematics and Evolution 210: 249-270.
105. WIKSTRÖM, N., V. SAVOLAINEN, AND M. W. CHASE. 2001. Evolution of the angiosperms: calibrating the family tree. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, B: 268: 2211-2220.
106. WOLFE, J. A. 1974. Fossil forms of Amentiferae. Brittonia 25: 334-355.
107. WOLFE, J. A. 1989. Leaf-architectural analysis of the Hamamelididae. In P. R. Crane and S. Blackmore [eds.], Evolution, systematics, and fossil history of the Hamamelidae, vol. 2, higher Hamamelidae. 75-104. Clarendon Press, Oxford, UK.
108. ZAVADA, M. S., AND M. KIM. 1996. Phylogenetic analysis of Ulmaceae. Plant Systematics and Evolution 200: 13-20.