Phylogeny and biogeography of Pomaria (Caesalpinioideae: Leguminosae)

Systematic Botany

Volumn 31, Issue 4, 2006, Pages 792-804

  Simpson, Beryl ^a   Larkin, Leah ^b   Weeks, Andrea ^c   McDill, Joshua ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO   (United States)

^c GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Amphi Atlantic; Amphitropical; Caesalpinia; Hoffmannseggia; Leguminosae; Pomaria

Indexed keywords

CAESALPINIA; CAESALPINIOIDEAE; FABACEAE; HOFFMANNSEGGIA; POMARIA;

EID: 33847703291     PISSN: 03636445     EISSN: 15482324     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1600/036364406779695915     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. ALFARO, M. E., S. ZOLLER, and F. LUTZONI. 2003. Bayes or bootstrap? A simulation study comparing the performance of Bayesian Markov Chain Monte Carlo sampling and bootstrapping in assessing phylogenetic confidence. Molecular Biology and Evolution 20: 255-266.
2. BENTHAM, G. 1865. Eucaesalpinieae. Pp. 565-566 in Genera Plantarum, eds. G. Bentham and J. D. Hooker. London: Reeve.
3. _. 1870. Caesalpinia. Pp. 72-72 in Flora brasiliensis, ed. C. F. P. v. Martius. Leipzig.
4. BRITTON, N. L. and J. N. ROSE. 1930. Caesalpiniaceae. North America Flora 23: 201-349.
5. CANDOLLE, A. P. D. 1825a. Prodromus systematis naturalis regni vegetabilis. Paris: Treuttel and Würtz.
6. _. 1825b. Mémoires sur la famille des légumineuses. Paris: Belin.
7. CAVANILLES, J. 1799. Icones et descriptiones plantarum. Madrid: Typographia regia.
8. CUMMINGS, M. P., S. A. HANDLEY, D. S. MEYERS, D. L. REED, A. ROKAS, and K. WINKA. 2003. Comparing bootstrap and posterior probability values in the four-taxon case. Systematic Biology 52: 477-487.
9. DOUADY, C. J., F. DELSUC, Y. BOUCHER, W. F. DOOLITTLE, and E. J. DOUZERY. 2003. Comparison of Bayesian and maximum likelihood bootstrap measures of phylogenetic reliability. Molecular Biology and Evolution 20: 248-254.
10. DOYLE, J. J. and J. L. DOYLE. 1987. A rapid DNA isolation procedure for small quantities of fresh leaf tissue. Phytochemical Bulletin 19: 11-15.
11. FARRIS, J. S., M. KÄLLERSJÖ, A. G. KLUGE, and C. BULT. 1994. Testing significance of incongruence. Cladistics 10: 315-319.
12. GENTRY, A. 1993. Diversity and floristic composition of lowland tropical forest in Africa and South America. Pp. 500-547 in Biological relationships between Africa and South America, ed. P. Goldblatt. New Haven: Yale University Press.
13. GOLDBLATT, P. 1978. An analysis of the flora of southern Africa: its characteristics, relationships, and origins. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 65: 369-436.
14. GOLDMAN, N., J. P. ANDERSON, and A. G. RODRIGO. 2000. Likelihood-based tests of topologies in phylogenetics. Systematic Biology 49: 652-670.
15. HILLIS, D. M., B. K. MABLE, and C. MORITZ. 1996. Applications of molecular systematics: The state of the field and a look to the future. Pp. 515-543 in Molecular systematics, ed. 2, eds. D. M. Hillis, C. Moritz, and B. K. Mable. Sunderland: Sinauer Associates.
16. HOLDER, M. and P. O. LEWIS. 2003. Phylogeny estimation: traditional and Bayesian approaches. Nature Reviews: Genetics 4: 275-284.
17. HUELSENBECK, J. P., D. M. HILLIS, and R. JONES. 1996. Parametric bootstrapping in molecular phylogenetics: applications and performance. Pp. 19-45 in Molecular zoology: advances, strategies, and protocols, eds. J. D. Faris and S. R. Palumbi. New York: Wiley-Liss.
18. _ and F. RONQUIST. 2001. MRBAYES: Bayesian inference of phylogenetic trees. Bioinformatics 17: 754-755.
19. _, B. LARGET, R. E. MILLER, and F. RONQUIST. 2002. Potential applications and pitfalls of Bayesian inference of phylogeny. Systematic Biology 51: 673-688.
20. _, F. RONQUIST, R. NIELSEN, and J. BOLLBACK. 2001. Bayesian inference of phylogeny and its impact on evolutionary biology. Science 294: 2310-2314.
21. LAVIN, M., B. P. SCHRIRE, G. P. LEWIS, R. T. PENNINGTON, A. DELGADO-SALINAS, M. THULIN, C. E. HUGHES, A. B. MATOS, and M. F. WOJCIECHOWSKI. 2004. Metacommunity process rather than continental tectonic history better explains geographically structured phylogenies in legumes. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Ser. B. 359: 1509-1522.
22. LEWIS, G. P. 1994. Systematic studies in Neotropical Caesalpinia L. (Leguminosae: Caesalpinioideae), including a revision of the Poincianella-Erythrostemon group. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of St. Andrews, Fife, Scotland.
23. _. 1998. Caesalpinia. A revision of the Poincianella- Erythrostemon group. Kew: Royal Botanic Gardens.
24. _. 2005. Caesalpinieae. Pp. 127-161 in Legumes of the World, eds. G. Lewis, B. Schrire, B. Mackinder, and M. Lock. Kew: Royal Botanic Gardens.
25. _ and B. D. SCHRIRE. 1995. A reappraisal of the Caesalpinia group (Caesalpinioideae: Caesalpinieae) using a phylogenetic analysis. Pp. 41-52 in Advances in legume systematics 7: phylogeny, eds. M. D. Crisp and J. J. Doyle. Kew: Royal Botanic Gardens.
26. LOOCKERMAN, D. J. and R. K. JANSEN. 1996. The use of herbarium material for DNA studies. Pp. 205-220 in Sampling the green world, ed. S. H. Sohmer. New York: Columbia University Press.
27. MADDISON, W. P. and D. R. MADDISON. 2000. MacClade. Version 4.0. Sunderland: Sinauer Associates.
28. POSADA, D. and K. A. CRANDALL. 1998. MODELTEST: testing the model of DNA substitution. Bioinformatics 14: 817-818.
29. RAMBAUT, A. and N. C. GRASSLY. 1997. Seq-gen: an application for the Monte Carlo simulation of DNA sequence evolution along phylogenetic trees. Computational Applications in Biosciences 13: 235-2238.
30. RENNER, S. 2004. Plant dispersal across the tropical Atlantic by wind and sea currents. International Journal of Plant Sciences 165: S23-S33.
31. RONQUIST, F. and J. P. HUELSENBECK. 2003. MrBayes 3: Bayesian phylogenetic inference under mixed models. Bioinformatics 19: 1572-1574.
32. RZEDOWSKI, J. 1997. Flora del Bajío y de regiones adyacentes. 51. Familia Leguminosae subfamilia Caesalpinioideae. Pátzcuaro: Instituto de Ecología.
33. SANG, T., D. J. CRAWFORD, and T. F. STUESSY. 1997. Chloroplast DNA phylogeny, reticulate evolution, and biogeography of Paeonia (Paeoniaceae). American Journal of Botany 84: 1120-1136.
34. SCHRIRE, B. D., M. LAVIN, and G. P. LEWIS. 2005a. Global distribution patterns of the Leguminosae: insights from recent phylogenies. Biologiske Skifter 55: 375-422.
35. _, G. P. LEWIS, and M. LAVIN. 2005b. Biogeography of the Leguminosae. Pp. 21-54 in Legumes of the World, eds. G. Lewis, B. Schrire, B. Mackinder, and M. Lock. Kew: Royal Botanic Gardens.
36. SIMPSON, B. B. 1998. A revision of Pomaria (Fabaceae) in North America. Lundellia 1: 46-71.
37. _ and G. P. LEWIS. 2003. New combinations in the genus Pomaria. Kew Bulletin 58: 175-184.
38. _ and B.-M. MIAO. 1997. The circumscription of Hoffmannseggia (Fabaceae, Caesalpinioideae, Caesalpinieae) and its allies using morphological and cpDNA restriction site data. Plant Systematics and Evolution 205: 157-178.
39. _, D. M. HELFGOTT, A. WEEKS, and L. L. LARKIN. 2004. Species relationships in Krameria (Krameriaceae) based on ITS sequences and morphology: implications for character utility and biogeography. Systematic Botany 29: 97-108.
40. _, L. L. LARKIN, and A. WEEKS. 2003. Progress towards resolving the relationships of the Caesalpinia group (Caesalpinieae: Caesalpinioideae: Leguminosae). Pp. 123-148 in Advances in legume systematics Part. 10, higher level systematics, eds. B. B. Klitgaard and A. Bruneau. Kew: Royal Botanic Gardens.
41. _, J. A. TATE, and A. WEEKS. 2005. The biogeography of Hoffmannseggia (Leguminosae: Caesalpinioideae: Caesalpinieae): a tale of many travels. Journal of Biogeography 32: 15-27.
42. SPRENGEL, K. 1827. Systema vegetabilium. Göttingen: Librariae Dieterichianae.
43. SUZUKI, Y., G. V. GLAZKO, and M. NEI. 2002. Overcredibility of molecular phylogenies obtained by Bayesian phylogenetics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 99: 16138-16143.
44. SWOFFORD, D. L. 2002. PAUP*, Phylogenetic analysis using parsimony (*and other methods). Version 4.0. Sunderland: Sinauer Associates.
45. TAUBERT, P. 1894. Caesalpinioideae. Pp. 125-184 in Die natürlichen Pflanzenfamilien, eds. A. Engler and K. Prantl. Leipzig: Wilhelm Engelmann.
46. THOMPSON, J. D., T. J. GIBSON, F. PLEWNIAK, F. JEANMOUGIN, and D. G. HIGGINS. 1997. The ClustalX windows interface: flexible strategies for multiple sequence alignment aided by quality analysis tools. Nucleic Acids Research 25: 4876-4882.
47. THORNE, R. F. 1973. Floristic relationships between tropical Africa and tropical America. Pp. 27-47 in Tropical forest ecosystems in Africa and South America, eds. B. J. Meggers, E. S. Ayensu, and W. D. Duckworth. Washington, D. C.: Smithsonian Institution Press.
48. ULIBARRI, E. A. 1996. Sinopsis de Caesalpinia y Hoffmannseggia (Leguminosae-Caesalpinioideae) de Sudamérica. Darwiniana 34: 299-348.
49. VOGEL, T. 1837. De Caesalpinieis Brasiliae. Linnaea 11: 401-408.
50. WALPERS, G. G. 1842. Repertorium Botanices Systematicae. Leipzig: Frideric Hofmeister.