Phylogenetic relationships of Ruteae (Rutaceae): New evidence from the chloroplast genome and comparisons with non-molecular data

Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution

Volumn 49, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 736-748

  Salvo, Gabriele ^a   Bacchetta, Gianluigi ^b   Ghahremaninejad, Farrokh ^c   Conti, Elena ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ZURICH   (Switzerland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CAGLIARI   (Italy)

^c KHARAZMI UNIVERSITY   (Iran)

Author keywords

Character mapping; Citrus family; Congruence; Homoplasy; Morphology; Phytochemistry; Ruta; Shimodaira Hasegawa test

Indexed keywords

CHLOROPLAST DNA; PLANT DNA;

ARTICLE; BAYES THEOREM; CHLOROPLAST GENOME; CLASSIFICATION; DNA SEQUENCE; GENETIC MARKER; GENETICS; MOLECULAR EVOLUTION; MONTE CARLO METHOD; PHYLOGENY; PROBABILITY; RUTACEAE; SEQUENCE ALIGNMENT; SPECIES DIFFERENTIATION; STATISTICAL MODEL;

BAYES THEOREM; DNA, CHLOROPLAST; DNA, PLANT; EVOLUTION, MOLECULAR; GENETIC MARKERS; GENETIC SPECIATION; GENOME, CHLOROPLAST; LIKELIHOOD FUNCTIONS; MARKOV CHAINS; MONTE CARLO METHOD; PHYLOGENY; RUTACEAE; SEQUENCE ALIGNMENT; SEQUENCE ANALYSIS, DNA;

CITRUS; DICTAMNUS; HAPLOPHYLLUM; RUTA; RUTACEAE;

EID: 56749156433     PISSN: 10557903     EISSN: 10959513     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ympev.2008.09.004     Document Type: Article

References (127)

1. Akaike H. A new look at the statistical model identification. IEEE Trans. Auto. Control. 19 (1974) 716-723
2. Bacchetta G., Brullo S., and Giusso del Galdo G. Ruta lamarmorae (Rutaceae), a new species from Sardinia. Edinburgh J. Bot. 63 (2006) 153-160
3. Baker R.H., Yu X.B., and DeSalle R. Assessing the relative contribution of molecular and morphological characters in simultaneous analysis trees. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 9 (1998) 427-436
4. Baum D.A., Small R.L., and Wendel J.F. Biogeography and floral evolution of baobabs (Adansonia, Bombacaceae) as inferred from multiple data sets. Syst. Biol. 47 (1998) 181-207
5. Bärner J. Serodiagnostische Verwandschaftforschungen innerhalb der Geraniales, Sapindales, Rhamnales und Malvales. Bibl. Bot., Stuttgart 94 (1927) 1-39
6. Bramwell D., and Bramwell Z.I. Wild Flowers of the Canary Islands (2001), Editorial Rueda, Madrid, Spain
7. Brooks D.R. Explanations of homoplasy at different levels of biological organization. In: Sanderson M.J., and Hufford L. (Eds). Homoplasy: The Recurrence of Similarity in Evolution (1996), Academic Press, San Diego 3-36
8. Bull J.J., Huelsenbeck J.P., Cunningham C.W., Swofford D.L., and Waddell P.J. Partitioning and combining data in phylogenetic analysis. Syst. Biol. 42 (1993) 384-397
9. Cannatella D.C., Hillis D.M., Chippindale P.T., Weigt L., Rand A.S., and Ryan M.J. Phylogeny of frogs of the Physalaemus pustulosus species group, with an examination of data incongruence. Syst. Biol. 47 (1998) 311-335
10. Chase M.W., Morton C.M., and Kallunki J.A. Phylogenetic relationships of Rutaceae: a cladistic analysis of the subfamilies using evidence from rbcL and atpB sequence variation. Am. J. Bot. 86 (1999) 1191-1199
11. Corner E.J.H. The Seeds of Dicotyledons (1976), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
12. Cunningham C.W. Is congruence between data partitions a reliable predictor of phylogenetic accuracy? Empirically testing an iterative procedure for choosing among phylogenetic methods. Syst. Biol. 46 (1997) 464-478
13. Da Silva M.F., Gottlieb O.R., and Ehrendorfer F. Chemosystematics of the Rutaceae: suggestions for a more natural taxonomy and evolutionary interpretation of the family. Plant Syst. Evol. 161 (1988) 97-134
14. Darlu P., and Lecointre G. When does the incongruence length difference test fail?. Mol. Biol. Evol. 19 (2002) 432-437
15. de Queiroz A. For consensus (sometimes). Syst. Biol. 42 (1993) 368-372
16. de Queiroz A., Donoghue M.J., and Kim J. Separate versus combined analysis of phylogenetic evidence. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 26 (1995) 657-681
17. Dolphin K., Belshaw R., Orme C.D.L., and Quicke D.L.J. Noise and incongruence: interpreting results of the incongruence length difference test. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 17 (2000) 401-406
18. Donoghue M.J., and Sanderson M.J. The suitability of molecular and morphological evidence in reconstructing plant phylogeny. In: Soltis P., Soltis D., and Doyle J. (Eds). Molecular Systematics of Plants (1992), Chapman and Hall, New York, London 340-368
19. Doyle J.J. Homoplasy connections and disconnections: genes and species, molecules and morphology. In: Sanderson M.J., and Hufford L. (Eds). Homoplasy: The Recurrence of Similarity in Evolution (1996), Academic Press, San Diego 37-66
20. Doyle J.J., Doyle J.L., Rauscher J.T., and Brown A.H.D. Diploid and polyploid reticulate evolution throughout the history of the perennial soybeans (Glycine subgenus Glycine). New Phytol. 161 (2004) 121-132
21. Endress P.K. Patterns of floral construction in ontogeny and phylogeny. Biol. J. Linnaean Soc. 39 (1990) 153-175
22. Endress P.K. Symmetry in flowers: diversity and evolution. Int. J. Plant Sci. 160 (1999) S3-S23
23. Engler A. Rutaceae. In: Engler A., and Prantl K. (Eds). Nat. Pflanzenfam III vol. 4 (1896), Engelmann, Leibzig 95-201
24. Engler A. Rutaceae. In: Engler A., and Prantl K. (Eds). Die natürlichen Pflanzenfamilien, 2. Aufl. 19a (1931), Engelmann, Leibzig 187-359
25. Farris J.S., Kallersjo M., Kluge A.G., and Bult C. Testing significance of incongruence. Cladistics 10 (1994) 315-319
26. Felsenstein J. Cases in which parsimony or compatibility methods will be positively misleading. Syst. Zool. 27 (1978) 401-410
27. Felsenstein J. Confidence limits on phylogenies: an approach using the Bootstrap. Evolution 39 (1985) 783-791
28. Fish F., and Waterman P.G. The chemosystematics of the Zanthoxylum/Fagara complex. Taxon 22 (1973) 177-203
29. Fitch W.M. Towards defining the course of evolution: minimum change for a specific tree topology. Syst. Zool. 20 (1971) 406-416
30. Gadek P.A., Fernando E.S., Quinn C.J., Hoot S.B., Terrazas T., Sheahan M.C., and Chase M.W. Sapindales: molecular delimitation and infraordinal groups. Am. J. Bot. 83 (1996) 802-811
31. Gatesy J., and Baker R.H. Hidden likelihood support in genomic data: can forty-five wrongs make a right?. Syst. Biol. 54 (2005) 483-492
32. Goldman N., Anderson J.P., and Rodrigo A.G. Likelihood-based tests of topologies in phylogenetics. Syst. Biol. 49 (2000) 652-670
33. Graham S.W., Kohn J.R., Morton B.R., Eckenwalder J.E., and Barrett S. Phylogenetic congruence and discordance among one morphological and three molecular data sets from Pontederiaceae. Syst. Biol. 47 (1998) 545-567
34. Grant V. Incongruence between cladistic and taxonomic systems. Am. J. Bot. 90 (2003) 1263-1270
35. Gray A.I., and Waterman P.G. Coumarins of the Rutaceae. Phytochemistry 17 (1978) 845-864
36. Guggisberg A., Mansion G., Kelso S., and Conti E. Evolution of biogeographic patterns, ploidy levels, and breeding systems in a diploid-polyploid species complex of Primula. New Phytol. 171 (2006) 617-632
37. Gut B.J. Beiträge zur morphologie des gynoeceums und der blütenachse einiger Rutaceen. Bot. Jahrb. 85 (1966) 10-247
38. Hart M.W., Johnson S.L., Addison J.A., and Byrne M. Strong character incongruence and character choice in phylogeny of sea stars of the Asterinidae. Invertebr. Biol. 123 (2004) 343-356
39. Hegnauer R. Comparative phytochemistry of alkaloids. In: Swain T. (Ed). Comparative Phytochemistry (1966), Academic Press, London and New York 211-230
40. Hendy M.D., and Penny D. A framework for the quantitative study of evolutionary trees. Syst. Zool. 38 (1989) 297-309
41. Hillis D.M. Molecular versus morphological approaches to systematics. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 18 (1987) 23-42
42. Hillis D.M. Approaches for assessing phylogenetic accuracy. Syst. Biol. 44 (1995) 3-16
43. Hufford L. Ontogenetic evolution, clade diversification, and homoplasy. In: Sanderson M.J., and Hufford L. (Eds). Homoplasy: The Recurrence of Similarity in Evolution (1996), Academic Press, San Diego 271-301
44. Hughes C.E., Lewis G.P., Yomona A.D., and Reynel C. Maraniona. A new dalbergioid legume genus (Leguminosae, Papilionoideae) from Peru. Syst. Bot. 29 (2004) 366-374
45. Hulsenbeck J.P., and Ronquist F. Mr Bayes: Bayesian inference of phylogeny. Bioinformatics 17 (2001) 754-755
46. Jussieu A. Rutaceae: Haplophyllum. Mém. Mus. Hist. Nat. 12 (1825) 464
47. Kelchner S.A. The evolution of non-coding chloroplast DNA and its application in plant systematics. Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard. 87 (2000) 482-498
48. Kim S.-C., Crawford D.J., and Jansen R.K. Phylogenetic relationships among the genera of the subtribe Sonchinae (Asteraceae): evidence from ITS sequences. Syst. Bot. 21 (1996) 417-432
49. Kishino H., and Hasegawa M. Evaluation of the maximum likelihood estimate of the evolutionary tree topologies from DNA sequence data, and the branching order in Hominoidea. J. Mol. Evol. 29 (1989) 170-179
50. Kluge A.G. Total evidence or taxonomic congruence. cladistics or consensus classification. Cladistics 14 (1998) 151-158
51. Kong Y.-C., Cheng K.-F., Ng K.-M., But P.P.-H., Li Q., Yu S.-X., Chang H.-T., Cambie R.C., Kinoshita T., Kan W.-S., and Waterman P.G. A chemotaxonomic division of Murraya based on the distribution of the alkaloids yuehchukene and girinimbine. Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 14 (1986) 491-497
52. Kron K.A., Judd W.S., and Crayn D.M. Phylogenetic analyses of Andromedeae (Ericaceae subfam. Vaccinioideae). Am. J. Bot. 86 (1999) 1290-1300
53. Lavin M., Pennington R.T., Klitgaard B.B., Sprent J.I., de Lima H.C., and Gasson P.E. The dalbergioid legumes (Fabaceae): delimitation of a pantropical monophyletic clade. Am. J. Bot. 88 (2001) 503-533
54. Lee M.S.Y. Uninformative characters and apparent conflict between molecules and morphology. Mol. Biol. Evol. 18 (2001) 676-680
55. Lee M.S.Y., and Hugall A.F. Partitioned likelihood support and the evaluation of data set conflict. Syst. Biol. 52 (2003) 15-22
56. Lewis P.O. A likelihood approach to estimating phylogeny from discrete morphological character data. Syst. Biol. 50 (2001) 913-925
57. Linnaeus C. Systema Naturae, sive regna tria naturae, systematice proposita per classes, ordines, genera, et species (1735), Apud Theodorum Haak, Leiden
58. Linnaeus C. Species Plantarum, exhibentes plantas rite cognitas, ad genera relatas, cum differentiis specificis, nominibus trivialibus, synonymis selectis, locis natalibus, secundum systema sexuale digestas (1753), Holmiae, Impensis Laurentii Salvii, Stockholm
59. Liscombe D.K., MacLeod B.P., Loukanina N., Nandi O.I., and Facchini P.J. Evidence for the monophyletic evolution of benzylisoquinoline alkaloid biosynthesis in angiosperms. Phytochemistry 66 (2005) 2500-2520
60. Lomolino M.V., Riddle B.R., and Brown J.H. Biogeography. third ed. (2006), Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, USA
61. Maddison P.G., and Maddison D.R. MacClade4: Analysis of Phylogeny and Character Evolution (2000), Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, USA
62. Marazzi B., Endress P.K., De Queiroz L.P., and Conti E. Phylogenetic relationships within Senna (Leguminosae, Cassiinae) based on three chloroplast DNA regions: patterns in the evolution of floral symmetry and extrafloral nectaries. Am. J. Bot. 93 (2006) 288-303
63. Mason-Gamer R.J., and Kellogg E.A. Testing for phylogenetic conflict among molecular data sets in the Triticeae (Gramineae). Syst. Biol. 45 (1996) 524-545
64. McKey D. Origins of novel alkaloid types: a mechanism for rapid phenotypic evolution of plant secondary compounds. Am. Nat. 115 (1980) 754-759
65. Mester I., and Vicol E.C. Contribution to the chemotaxonomy of the Haplophyllum genus. Rev. Roum. Biol. 16 (1971) 221-233
66. Minelli A. Molecules, developmental modules, and phenotypes: a combinatorial approach to homology. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 9 (1998) 340-347
67. Miyamoto M., and Fitch W.M. Testing species phylogenies and phylogenetic methods with congruence. Syst. Biol. 44 (1995) 64-76
68. Moore J.A. Floral anatomy and phylogeny in the Rutaceae. New Phytol. 35 (1936) 318-322
69. Morton C.M., Grant M., and Blackmore S. Phylogenetic relationships of the Aurantioideae inferred from chloroplast DNA sequence data. Am. J. Bot. 90 (2003) 1463-1469
70. Mothes K. The problem of chemical convergence in secondary metabolism. Sci. Scientists (1981) 323-326
71. Moylan E.C., Bennett J.R., Carine M.A., Olmstead R.G., and Scotland R.W. Phylogenetic relationships among Strobilanthes s.l. (Acanthaceae): evidence from ITS nrDNA, trnL-F cpDNA, and morphology. Am. J. Bot. 91 (2004) 724-735
72. Mueller R.L., Robert Macey J., Jaekel M., Wake D.B., and Boore J.L. Morphological homoplasy, life history evolution, and historical biogeography of plethodontid salamanders inferred from complete mitochondrial genomes. PNAS 101 (2004) 13820-13825
73. Muellner A.N., Vassiliades D.D., and Renner S.S. Placing Biebersteiniaceae, a herbaceous clade of Sapindales, in a temporal and geographic context. Plant Syst. Evol (2007) 10.1007/s00606-007-0546-x Available online
74. Nandi O.I., Chase M.W., and Endress P.K. A combined cladistic analysis of angiosperms using rbcL and non-molecular data sets. Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard. 85 (1998) 137-214
75. Navarro F.B., Suarez-Santiago V.N., and Blanca G. A new species of Haplophyllum A. Juss (Rutaceae) from the Iberian peninsula: evidence from morphological, karyological and molecular analyses. Ann. Bot. 94 (2004) 571-582
76. Ng K.M., But P.P.-H., Gray A.I., Hartley T.G., Kong Y.-C., and Waterman P.G. The biochemical systematics of Tetradium, Euodia, and Melicope and their significance in the Rutaceae. Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 15 (1987) 587-593
77. Norup M.V., Dransfield J., Chase M.W., Barfod A.S., Fernando E.S., and Baker W.J. Homoplasious character combinations and generic delimitation: a case study from the Indo-Pacific arecoid palms (Arecaceae: Areceae). Am. J. Bot. 93 (2006) 1065-1080
78. Novacek M.J. Morphological and molecular inroads to phylogeny. In: Grande L., and Rieppel O. (Eds). Interpreting the Hierarchy of Nature: From Systematic Patterns to Evolutionary Process Theories (1994), Academic Press Inc., San Diego 85-131
79. Patterson C. Molecules and Morphology in Evolution: Conflict or Compromise? (1988), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
80. Porter J.M., and Johnson L.A. A phylogenetic classification of Polemoniaceae. Aliso 19 (2000) 55-91
81. Posada D., and Crandall K.A. Modeltest: testing the model of DNA substitution. Bioinformatics 14 (1998) 817-818
82. Price J.R. The distribution of alkaloids in the Rutaceae. In: Swain T. (Ed). Chemical Plant Taxonomy (1963), Academic Press, London and New York 429-452
83. Quicke D.L.J., Jones O.R., and Epstein D.R. Correcting the problem of false incongruence due to noise imbalance in the incongruence length difference (ILD) test. Syst. Biol. 56 (2007) 496-503
84. Reimann A., Nurhayati N., Backenköhler A., and Oberand D. Repeated evolution of the pyrrolizidine alkaloid-mediated defense system in separate angiosperm lineages. Plant Cell 16 (2004) 2772-2784
85. Rieseberg L.H., Whitton J., and Linder C.R. Molecular marker incongruence in plant hybrid zones and phylogenetic trees. Acta Bot. Neerl. 45 (1996) 243-262
86. Roalson E.H., Boggan J.K., Skog L.E., and Zimmer E.A. Untangling Gloxinieae (Gesneriaceae). I. Phylogenetic patterns and generic boundaries inferred from nuclear, chloroplast, and morphological cladistic datasets. Taxon 54 (2005) 389-410
87. Ronquist F., and Huelsenbeck J.P. MrBayes 3: Bayesian phylogenetic inference under mixed models. Bioinformatics 19 (2003) 1572-1574
88. Rønsted N., Salvo G., and Savolainen V. Biogeographical and phylogenetic origins of African fig species (Ficus section Galoglychia). Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 43 (2007) 190-201
89. Rutschmann F., Eriksson T., Abu Salim K., and Conti E. Assessing calibration uncertainty in molecular dating: the assignment of fossils to alternative calibration points. Syst. Biol. 56 (2007) 591-608
90. Samuel R., Ehrendorfer F., Chase M.W., and Greger H. Phylogenetic analyses of the Aurantioideae (Rutaceae) based on non-coding plastid DNA sequences and phytochemical features. Plant Biol. 3 (2001) 77-87
91. San Miguel E. Rue (Ruta L., Rutaceae) in traditional Spain: frequency and distribution of its medicinal and symbolic applications. Econ. Bot. 57 (2003) 231-244
92. Sanderson M.J., and Hufford L. Homoplasy: The Recurrence of Similarity in Evolution (1996), Academic Press, San Diego, USA
93. Sang T., Crawford D.J., and Stuessy T.F. Chloroplast DNA phylogeny, reticulate evolution, and biogeography of Paeonia (Paeoniaceae). Am. J. Bot. 84 (1997) 1120-1136
94. Saunders E.R. On carpel polymorphism. IV. Ann. Bot. 48 (1934) 643-692
95. Scholz H. Rutales. In: Melchior H., and Wedermann E. (Eds). A. Engler's Syllabus der Pflanzenfamilien, vol. 2. twelveth ed. (1964), Bornträger, Berlin 262-277
96. Scott K.D., McIntyre C.L., and Playford J. Molecular analyses suggest a need for a significant rearrangement of Rutaceae subfamilies and a minor reassessment of species relationships within Flindersia. Plant Syst. Evol. 223 (2000) 15-27
97. Shimodaira H., and Hasegawa M. Multiple comparisons of log-likelihoods with applications to phylogenetic inference. Mol. Biol. Evol. 16 (1999) 1114-1116
98. Simões A., Endress M., van der Niet T., Conti E., and Kinoshita L.S. Tribal and intergeneric relationships of Mesechiteae (Apocynoideae, Apocynaceae): evidence from three noncoding plastid DNA regions and morphology. Am. J. Bot. 91 (2004) 1409-1418
99. Simões A.O., Endress M., van der Niet T., Kinoshita L.S., and Conti E. Is Mandevilla (Apocynaceae, Mesechiteae) monophyletic? Evidence from five plastid DNA loci and morphology. Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard. 93 (2006) 565-591
100. Song W.-H., Li X.-D., Li X.-W., Huang H.-W., and Li J.-Q. Genetic diversity and conservation strategy of Psilopeganum sinense, a rare species in the three-gorges reservoir area. Biodiver. Sci. 12 (2004) 227-236
101. Stace C.A. Plant taxonomy and biosystematics-does DNA provide all the answers?. Taxon 54 (2005) 999-1007
102. Stevens, P.F., 2001 onwards. Angiosperm Phylogeny Website. Version 8, June 2007. Available from: .
103. Swofford D.L. When are phylogeny estimates from molecular and morphological data incongruent?. In: Miyamoto M.M., and Cracraft J. (Eds). Phylogenetic Analysis of DNA Sequences (1991), Oxford University Press, New York 295-333
104. Swofford D.L. PAUP*4.0b10: Phylogenetic Analysis Using Parsimony (* and other methods) (2001), Sinauer, Sunderland, USA
105. Sytsma K.J. DNA and morphology: inference of plant phylogeny. Trends Ecol. Evol. 5 (1990) 104-110
106. Taberlet P., Gielly L., Pautou G., and Bouvet J. Universal primers for amplification of 3 non-coding regions of chloroplast DNA. Plant Mol. Biol. 17 (1991) 1105-1109
107. Tang, F., Ye, Q., Yao, X., Huang, H., 2007. Isolation and characterization of microsatellite loci in Psilopeganum sinense Hemsl. (Rutaceae), an endangered herb endemic to Yangtze River valley. Molecular Ecology Notes, published online, doi: 10.1111/j.1471-8286.2007.01933.x.
108. Tilak V.D., and Nene P.M. Floral anatomy of the Rutaceae. Ind. J. Bot. 1 (1978) 83-90
109. Townsend C.C. Rutaceae. In: Tutin T.G. (Ed). Flora Europea, vol.2, Rosaceae to Umbelliferae (1968), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 227-230
110. Townsend C.C. Taxonomic revision of the genus Haplophyllum (Rutaceae). Hooker's Icones Plantarum Vol. XL, parts I, II, and III (1986), Bentham-Moxon Trustees, Kent, UK
111. Tucker S.C., Douglas A.W., and Liang H.-X. Utility of ontogenetic and conventional characters in determining phylogenetic relationships of Saururaceae and Piperaceae (Piperales). Syst. Bot. 18 (1993) 614-641
112. Van der Niet T., Linder P.H., Bytebier B., and Bellstedt D.U. Molecular markers reject monophyly of the subgenera of Satyrium (Orchidaceae). Syst. Bot. 30 (2005) 263-274
113. Wahlberg N., and Nylin S. Morphology versus molecules: resolution of the positions of Nymphalis, Polygonia, and related genera (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae). Cladistics 19 (2003) 213-223
114. Waterman P.G. Alkaloids of the Rutaceae: their distribution and systematic significance. Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 3 (1975) 149-180
115. Waterman P.G. Phylogenetic implications of the distribution of secondary metabolites within the Rutales. In: Waterman P.G., and Grundon M.F. (Eds). Chemistry and Chemical Taxonomy of the Rutales (1983), Academic Press, London 377-400
116. Waterman P.G. Chemosystematics of the Rutaceae: comments on the interpretation of Da Silva et al. Plant Syst. Evol. 173 (1990) 39-48
117. Waterman P.G. Alkaloid chemosystematics. In: Cordell G.A. (Ed). The Alkaloids: Chemistry and Biology (1998), Academic Press, USA 537-565
118. Waterman P.G., and Grundon M.F. Chemistry and Chemical Taxonomy of the Rutales (1983), Academic Press, London
119. Wiens J.J., Chippindale P.T., and Hillis D.M. When are phylogenetic analyses misled by convergence? A case study in Texas cave salamanders. Syst. Biol. 52 (2003) 501-514
120. Wiens J.J., Fetzner J.W., Parkinson C.L., and Reeder T.W. Hylid frog phylogeny and sampling strategies for speciose clades. Syst. Biol. 54 (2005) 719-748
121. Wink M. Evolution of secondary metabolites from an ecological and molecular phylogenetic perspective. Phytochemistry 64 (2003) 3-19
122. Wink M., and Witte L. Evidence for a wide spread occurrence of the genes of quinolizidine alkaloid biosynthesis. Induction of alkaloid accumulation in cell suspension cultures of alkaloid-"free" species. FEBS Lett. 159 (1983) 196-200
123. Won H., and Renner S.S. Horizontal gene transfer from flowering plants to Gnetum. PNAS 100 (2003) 10824-10829
124. Wortley A.H., and Scotland R.W. Determining the potential utility of datasets for phylogeny reconstruction. Taxon 55 (2006) 431-442
125. Yoder A.D., Irwin J.A., and Payseur B.A. Failure of the ILD to determine data combinability for slow loris phylogeny. Syst. Biol. 50 (2001) 408-424
126. Young N.D., and Healy J. Gapcoder automates the use of indel characters in phylogenetic analysis. BMC Bioinform. 4 (2003) 6
127. Zakaria M.B. The phytochemistry of Rutaceae species with special reference to Melicope. Malayan Nat. J. 55 (2001) 241-250