Evolutionary relationships in the Spermacoceae alliance (Rubiaceae) using information from six molecular loci: Insights into systematic affinities of Neohymenopogon and Mouretia

Taxon

Volumn 58, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 793-810

  Rydin, Catarina ^a   Razafimandimbison, Sylvain G ^b   Khodabandeh, Anbar ^b   Bremer, Birgitta ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ZURICH   (Switzerland)

^b STOCKHOLM UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Anthospermeae; Argostemmateae; Danaideae; Paederieae; Rate heterogeneity; Saprosma; Theligonum

Indexed keywords

DICOTYLEDON; EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY; FRUIT; GENETIC MARKER; HETEROGENEITY; LIFE HISTORY; PHYLOGENETICS; TAXONOMY;

ANTHOSPERMEAE; ARGOSTEMMA; ARGOSTEMMATEAE; CARPACOCE; DANAIDEAE; DUNNIA; MOURETIA; MYCETIA; PAEDERIEAE; RUBIACEAE; RUBIOIDEAE; SAPROSMA; SPERMACOCEAE; THELIGONUM;

EID: 70349525316     PISSN: 00400262     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/tax.583009     Document Type: Article

References (92)

1. Akaike, H. 1973. Information theory as an extension of the maximum likelihood principle. Pp. 267-281 in: Petrov, B.N. & Csaki, F. (eds), Second International Symposium of Information Theory. Akademiai Kiado, Budapest.
2. Alejandro, G.D., Razafimandimbison, S.G. & Liede- Schumann, S. 2005. Polyphyly of Mussaenda inferred from ITS and trnT-F data and its implication for generic limits in Mussaendeae (Rubiaceae). Amer. J. Bot. 92: 544-557.
3. Anderson, C.L., Rova, J.H.E. & Andersson, L. 2001. Mo- lecular phylogeny of the tribe Anthospermeae (Rubiaceae): systematic and biogeographic implications. Austral. Syst. Bot. 14: 231-244.
4. Andersson, L. 2001. Margaritopsis (Rubiaceae, Psychotrieae) is a pantropical genus. Syst. Geogr. Pl. 71: 73-85.
5. Andersson, L. 2002. Relationships and generic circumscription in the Psychotria complex (Rubiaceae, Psychotrieae). Syst. Geogr. Pl. 72: 167-202.
6. Andersson, L. & Antonelli, A. 2005. Phylogeny of the tribe Cinchoneae (Rubiaceae), its position in Cinchonoideae, and description of a new genus, Ciliosemina. Taxon 54: 17-28.
7. Andersson, L. & Persson, C. 1991. Circumscription of the tribe Cinchoneae (Rubiaceae) - a cladistic approach. Pl. Syst. Evol. 178: 65-94.
8. Andersson, L. & Rova, J.H.E. 1999. The rps16 intron and the phylogeny of Rubioideae (Rubiaceae). Pl. Syst. Evol. 214: 161-186.
9. Andreasen, K. & Baldwin, B.G. 2001. Unequal evolutionary rates between annual and perennial lineages of checker mallows (Sidalcea, Malvaceae): evidence from 18S-26S rDNA internal and external transcribed spacers. Molec. Biol. Evol. 18: 936-944.
10. Backlund, M., Bremer, B. & Thulin, M. 2007. Paraphyly of Paederieae, recognition of Putorieae and expansion of Plocama (Rubiaceae-Rubioideae). Taxon 56: 315-328.
11. Backlund, M., Oxelman, B. & Bremer, B. 2000. Phylogenetic relationships within the Gentianales based on ndhF and rbcL sequences, with particular reference to the Logania- ceae. Amer. J. Bot. 87: 1029-1043.
12. Bennet, S.S.R. 1981. Rubiaceae. Indian Forester 107: 436-437.
13. Bousquet, J., Strauss, S.H., Doerksen, A.H. & Price, R.A. 1992. Extensive variation in evolutionary rate of rbcL gene-sequences among seed plants. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 89: 7844-7848.
14. Bremekamp, C.E.B. 1952. The African species of Oldenlandia L. sensu Hiern et K. Schumann. Verh. Kon. Ned. Akad. Wetensch., Afd. Natuurk., Sect. 2 48: 1-297.
15. Bremekamp, C.E.B. 1966. Remarks on the position, the de- limitation and the subdivision of the Rubiaceae. Acta Bot. Neerl. 15: 1-33.
16. Bremer, B. 1989. The genus Argostemma (Rubiaceae-Argostem- mateae) in Borneo. Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard. 76: 7-49.
17. Bremer, B. 1996. Phylogenetic studies within Rubiaceae and relationships to other families based on molecular data. Opera Bot. Belg. 7: 33-50.
18. Bremer, B., Andreasen, K. & Olsson, D. 1995. Subfamilial and tribal relationships in the Rubiaceae based on rbcL sequence data. Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard. 82: 383-397.
19. Bremer, B., Bremer, K., Heidari, N., Erixon, P., Olmstead, R.G., Anderberg, A.A., Källersjö, M. & Barkhorda-rian, E. 2002. Phylogenetics of asterids based on 3 coding and 3 non-coding chloroplast DNA markers and the utility of non-coding DNA at higher taxonomic levels. Molec. Phylog. Evol. 24: 274-301.
20. Bremer, B. & Eriksson, T. 2009. Timetree of Rubiaceae - phy- logeny and dating the family, subfamilies and tribes. Int. J. Pl. Sci. 170: 766-793.
21. Bremer, B., Jansen, R.K., Oxelman, B., Backlund, M., Lantz, H. & Kim, K. 1999. More characters or more taxa for a robust phylogeny-case study from the coffee family (Rubiaceae). Syst. Biol. 48: 413-435.
22. Bremer, B. & Manen, J.F. 2000. Phylogeny and classification of the subfamily Rubioideae (Rubiaceae). Pl. Syst. Evol. 225: 43-72.
23. Bremer, B. & Thulin, M. 1998. Collapse of Isertieae, re-estab- lishment of Mussaendeae, and a new genus of Sabiceeae (Rubiaceae); phylogenetic relationships based on rbcL data. Pl. Syst. Evol. 211: 71-92.
24. Buchner, R. & Puff, C. 1993. The genus complex Danais-Schismatoclada-Payera (Rubiaceae). Characters states, generic delimitation and taxonomic position. Adansonia 1-4: 23-74.
25. Burnham, K.P. & Anderson, D.R. 2003. Model Selection and Multimodel Inference: A Practical Information-theoretic Approach, 2nd ed. Springer, New York.
26. Chen, W.C. 1999. Dunnia Tutch. Pp. 233-235, plate 258 in: Lo, H.S., (ed.), Flora Reipublicae Popularis Sinicae, vol. 71/2. Science Press, Beijing. [In Chinese.
27. Church, S.A. 2003. Molecular phylogenetics of Houstonia (Ru- biaceae): descending aneuploidy and breeding system evo-lution in the radiation of the lineage across North America. Molec. Phylog. Evol. 27: 223-238.
28. Church, S.A. & Taylor, D.R. 2005. Speciation and hybridiza- tion among Houstonia (Rubiaceae) species: the influence of polyploidy on reticulate evolution. Amer. J. Bot. 92: 1372-1380.
29. Classen-Bockhoff, R. 1996. A survey of flower-like inflo- rescences in the Rubiaceae. Opera Bot. Belg. 7: 329-367.
30. Dessein, S., Ochoterena, H., De Block, P., Lens, F., Robbrecht, E., Schols, P., Smets, E., Vinckier, S. & Huysmans, S. 2005. Palynological characters and their phylogenetic signal in Rubiaceae. Bot. Rev. 71: 354-414.
31. Galtier, N., Gouy, M. & Gautier, C. 1996. SEAVIEW and PHYLO_WIN: two graphic tools for sequence align- ment and molecular phylogeny. Comput. Appl. Biosci. 12: 543-548.
32. Gaut, B.S., Muse, S.V., Clark, W.D. & Clegg, M.T. 1992. Relative rates of nucleotide substitution at the rbcL locus of monocotyledonous plants. J. Molec. Evol. 35: 292-303.
33. Ge, X.J., Chiang, Y.C., Chou, C.H. & Chiang, T.Y. 2002. Nested clade analysis of Dunnia sinensis (Rubiaceae), a monotypic genus from China based on organelle DNA sequences. Cons. Genet. 3: 351-362.
34. Govaerts, R., Andersson, L., Robbrecht, E., Bridson, D., Davis, A., Schanzer, I. & Sonke, B. 2006. World Checklist of Rubiaceae. The Board of Trustees of the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew.
35. Groeninckx, I., Dessein, S., Ochoterena, H., Persson, C., Motley, T., Kårehed, J., Bremer, B., Huysmans, S. & Smets, E. 2009 Phylogeny of the herbaceous tribe Sper-macoceae (Rubiaceae) based on plastid DNA data. Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard. 96: 109-132.
36. Guindon, S. & Gascuel, O. 2003. A simple, fast, and accurate algorithm to estimate large phylogenies by maximum like- lihood. Syst. Biol. 52: 696-704.
37. Hasegawa, M., Kishino, H. & Yano, T. 1985. Dating the hu- man-ape splitting by a molecular clock of mitochondrial DNA. J. Molec. Evol. 22: 160-174.
38. Hooker, J.D. 1880. Flora of British India. Reeve, London.
39. Huelsenbeck, J.P. & Ronquist, F.R. 2001. MRBAYES: Bayes- ian inference of phylogenetic trees. Bioinformatics 17: 754-755.
40. Kårehed, J. & Bremer, B. 2007. The systematics of Knoxieae (Rubiaceae) - molecular data and their taxonomic conse- quences. Taxon 56: 1051-1076.
41. Kårehed, J., Groeninckx, I., Dessein, S., Motley, T. & Bremer, B. 2008. The phylogenetic utility of chloroplast and nuclear DNA markers and the phylogeny of the Ru- biaceae tribe Spermacoceae. Molec. Phylog. Evol. 49: 843-866.
42. Manen, J.F. & Natali, A. 1995. Comparison of the evolution of ribulose-1,5-biphosphate carboxylase (rbcL) and atpB-rbcL noncoding spacer sequences in a recent plant group, the tribe Rubieae (Rubiaceae). J. Molec. Evol. 41: 920-927.
43. Manen, J.F., Natali, A. & Ehrendorfer, F. 1994. Phylogeny of Rubiaceae-Rubieae inferred from the sequence of a cpDNA intergene region. Pl. Syst. Evol. 190: 195-211.
44. Mouly, A., Razafimandimbison, S.G., Achille, F., Haever- mans, T. & Bremer, B. 2007. Phylogenetic placement of Rhopalobrachium fragrans (Rubiaceae): evidence from molecular (rps16 and trnT-F) and morphological data. Syst. Bot. 32: 872-882.
45. Nakamura, K., Chung, S.W., Kokubugata, G., Denda, T. & Yokota, M. 2006. Phylogenetic systematics of the mono- typic genus Hayataella (Rubiaceae) endemic to Taiwan. J. Pl. Res. 119: 657-661.
46. Natali, A., Manen, J.F. & Ehrendorfer, F. 1995. Phylog- eny of the Rubiaceae Rubioideae, in particular the tribe Rubieae - evidence from a noncoding chloroplast DNA- sequence. Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard. 82: 428-439.
47. Nepokroeff, M., Bremer, B. & Sytsma, K.J. 1999. Reorga- nization of the genus Psychotria and tribe Psychotrieae (Rubiaceae) inferred from ITS and rbcL sequence data. Syst. Bot. 24: 5-27.
48. Nie, Z.L., Wen, J., Sun, H. & Bartholomew, B. 2005. Mono- phyly of Kelloggia Torrey ex Benth. (Rubiaceae) and evo- lution of its intercontinental disjunction between west- ern North America and eastern Asia. Amer. J. Bot. 92: 642-652.
49. Novotny, V., Basset, Y., Miller, S.E., Weiblen, G.D., Bremer, B., Cizek, L. & Drozd, P. 2002. Low host specificity of herbivorous insects in a tropical forest. Nature 416: 841- 844.
50. Nylander, J.A.A. 2004a. MrAIC.pl. Program distributed by the author, Evolutionary Biology Centre, Uppsala University, Uppsala. http://www.abc.se/nylander/.
51. Nylander, J.A.A. 2004b. MrModeltest v2. Program distributed by the author, Evolutionary Biology Centre, Uppsala Uni- versity, Uppsala. http://www.abc.se/nylander/.
52. Oxelman, B. 1996. RAPD patterns, nrDNA ITS sequences and morphological patterns in Silene section Sedoineae (Caryophyllaceae). Pl. Syst. Evol. 201: 93-116.
53. Oxelman, B., Liden, M. & Berglund, D. 1997. Chloroplast rps16 intron phylogeny of the tribe Sileneae (Caryophyl- laceae). Pl. Syst. Evol. 206: 393-410.
54. Piesschaert, F., Andersson, L., Jansen, S., Dessein, S., Robbrecht, E. & Smets, E. 2000. Searching for the taxonomic position of the African genus Colletoecema (Rubiaceae): morphology and anatomy compared to an rps16-intron analysis of the Rubioideae. Canad. J. Bot. 78: 288-304.
55. Pitard, J. 1922. Rubiaceae. Pp. 71 in: Lecomte, P.H. (ed.), Flore Génerale de L'Indo-Chine. Masson et Cie, Paris.
56. Popp, M. & Oxelman, B. 2001. Inferring the history of the polyploid Silene aegaea (Caryophyllaceae) using plastid and homoeologous nuclear DNA sequences. Molec. Phy- log. Evol. 20: 474-481.
57. Posada, D. & Buckley, T.R. 2004. Model selection and model averaging in phylogenetics: advantages of Akaike information criterion and Bayesian approaches over likelihood ratio tests. Syst. Biol. 53: 793-808.
58. Posada, D. & Crandall, K.A. 2001. Selecting the best-fit model of nucleotide substitution. Syst. Biol. 50: 580-601.
59. Puff, C. 1982. The delimitation of the tribe Antospermeae and its affinities to the Paederieae (Rubiaceae). Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 84: 355-377.
60. Puff, C. 1992. On the correct tribal position of Saprosma Bl. (Rubiaceae). Pp. 34 in: Second Flora Malesiana Sympo- sium, Yogyakarta 7-12 September 1992. Programme & Summaries of Papers and Posters. Herbarium Bogoriense, Bogor. [Abstract.]
61. Puff, C., Chayamarit, K. & Chamchumroon, V. 2005. Ru- biaceae of Thailand: A Pictorial Guide to Indigenous and Cultivated Genera. The Forest Herbarium, National Park, Wildlife and Plant Conservation Department, Bangkok.
62. Puff, C., Igersheim, A., Buchner, R. & Rohrhofer, U. 1995. United stamens of Rubiaceae. Morphology, anatomy; their role in pollination ecology. Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard. 82: 357-382.
63. Rambaut, A. 1996. Se-Al: Sequence Alignment Editor. Avail- able at http://evolve.zoo.ox.ac.uk.
64. Razafimandimbison, S.G. & Bremer, B. 2006. Taxonomic revision of the tribe Hymenodictyeae (Rubiaceae, Cin- chonoideae). Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 152: 331-386.
65. Razafimandimbison, S.G., Rydin, C. & Bremer, B. 2008. Evolution and trends in the Psychotrieae alliance (Rubia-ceae) - a rarely reported evolutionary change of many-seeded carpels from one-seeded carpels. Molec. Phylog. Evol. 48: 207-223.
66. Robbrecht, E. 1982. Pollen morphology of the tribes Antho- spermeae and Paederieae (Rubiaceae) in relation to tax- onomy. Bull. Jard. Bot. Natl. Belg. 52: 349-366.
67. Robbrecht, E. 1988. Tropical woody Rubiaceae. Opera Bot. Belg. 1: 1-271.
68. Robbrecht, E. 1993. Supplement to the 1988 outline of the clas- sification of the Rubiaceae. Index to genera. Pp. 173-196 in: Robbrecht, E. (ed.), Advances in Rubiaceae Macro- systematics. Opera Botanica Belgica 6. National Botanic Garden of Belgium, Meise.
69. Robbrecht, E. & Manen, J.-F. 2006. The major evolutionary lineages of the coffee family (Rubiaceae, angiosperms). Combined analysis (nDNA and cpDNA) to infer the posi-tion of Coptosapelta and Luculia, and supertree construc-tion based on rbcL, rps16, trnL-trnF and atpB-rbcL data. A new classification in two subfamilies, Cinchonoideae and Rubioideae. Syst. Geogr. Pl. 76: 85-146.
70. Ronquist, F. & Huelsenbeck, J.P. 2003. MrBayes 3: Bayesian phylogenetic inference under mixed models. Bioinformat- ics 19: 1572-1574.
71. Rova, J.H.E., Delprete, P.G., Andersson, L. & Albert, V.A. 2002. A trnL-F cpDNA sequence study of the Condam- ineeae-Rondeletieae-Sipaneeae complex with implica- tions on the phylogeny of the Rubiaceae. Amer. J. Bot. 89: 145-159.
72. Rutishauser, R., Ronse Decraene, L.P., Smets, E. & Men- doza-Heuer, I. 1998. Theligonum cynocrambe: develop- mental morphology of a peculiar rubiaceous herb. Pl. Syst. Evol. 210: 1-24.
73. Rydin, C., Kainulainen, K., Razafimandimbison, S.G., Smedmark, J.E.E. & Bremer, B. 2009. Deep divergences in the coffee family and the systematic position of Acran- thera. Pl. Syst. Evol. 278: 101-123.
74. Rydin, C., Razafimandimbison, S.G. & Bremer, B. 2008. Rare and enigmatic genera (Dunnia, Schizocolea, Colletoecema), sisters to species-rich clades: phylogeny and aspects of conservation biology in the coffee family. Molec. Phylog. Evol. 48: 74-83.
75. Schwartz, G. 1978. Estimating the dimensions of a model. Ann. Statist. 6: 461-464.
76. Smedmark, J.E.E., Rydin, C., Razafimandimbison, S.G., Khan, S.A., Liede-Schumann, S. & Bremer, B. 2008. A phylogeny of Urophylleae (Rubiaceae) based on rps16 intron data. Taxon 57: 24-32.
77. Smith, S.A. & Donoghue, M.J. 2008. Rates of molecular evo- lution are linked to life history in flowering plants. Science 322: 86-89.
78. Sonké, B., Dessein, S., Taedoumg, H., Groeninckx, I. & Rob- brecht, E. 2008. A new speices of Colletoecema (Rubia- ceae) from southern Cameroon with a discussion of rela- tionships among basal Rubioideae. Blumea 53: 533-547.
79. Staden, R. 1996.The Staden sequence analysis package. Molec. Biotechnol. 5: 233-241.
80. Struwe, L., Thiv, M., Kadereit, J.W., Pepper, A.S.-R., Mot- ley, T.J., White, P.J., Rova, J.H.E., Potgieter, K. & Al- bert, V.A. 1998. Saccifolium (Saccifoliaceae), an endemic of Sierra de la Neblina on the Brazilian-Venezuelan border, is related to temperate-alpine lineages of Gentianaceae. Harvard Pap. Bot. 3: 199-214.
81. Swofford, D.L. 1998. PAUP*. Phylogenetic analysis using par- simony (*and other methods). Sinauer, Sunderland.
82. Taberlet, P., Gielly, L., Pautou, G. & Bouvet, J. 1991. Univer- sal primers for amplification of three non-coding regions of chloroplast DNA. Pl. Molec. Biol. 17: 1105-1109.
83. Tange, C. 1997. A revision of the genus Mouretia (Rubiaceae). Nord. J. Bot. 17: 123-132.
84. Tavare, S. 1986. Some probabilistic and statistical problems on the analysis of DNA sequences. Pp. 57-86 in: Miura, R.M. (ed.), Some Mathematical Questions in Biology - DNA Se- quence Analysis. American Mathematical Society, Provi- dence.
85. Thulin, M. & Bremer, B. 2004. Studies in the tribe Sperma- coceae (Rubiaceae-Rubioideae): the circumscriptions of Amphiasma and Pentanopsis and the affinities of Phylo- hydrax. Pl. Syst. Evol. 247: 233-239.
86. Tosh, J., De Block, P., Davis, A.P., Dessein, S., Robbrecht, E. & Smets, E.F. 2008. The tribal placement of the mono- specific tropical African genus Petitiocodon (Rubiaceae) based on molecular data and morphology. Blumea 53: 549-565.
87. Tutcher, W.J. 1905. Description of some new species, and notes on other Chinese plants. J. Linn. Soc. Bot. 37: 58-70.
88. Verdcourt, B. 1958. Remarks on the classification of the Rubia- ceae. Bull. Jard. Bot. État Bruxelles 28: 209-281.
89. Wallich, N. 1824. Hymenopogon Wall. Pp. 156-158 in: Rox- burgh, W. (ed.), Flora Indica. Mission press, Serampore.
90. Whittle, C.A. & Johnston, M.O. 2003. Broad-scale analysis contradicts the theory that generation time affects mo- lecular evolutionary rates in plants. J. Molec. Evol. 56: 223-233.
91. Xiao, L.Q. & Zhu, H. 2007. Paraphyly and phylogenetic rela- tionships in Lasianthus (Rubiaceae) inferred from chloro- plast rps16 data. Bot. Stud. 48: 227-232.
92. Yang, Z. 1993. Maximum likelihood estimation of phylogeny from DNA sequences when substitution rates differ over sites. Molec. Biol. Evol. 10: 1396-1401.