Spikelet structure and development in Cyperoideae (Cyperaceae): A monopodial general model based on ontogenetic evidence

Annals of Botany

Volumn 105, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 555-571

  Vrijdaghs, Alexander ^a   Reynders, Marc ^b   Larridon, Isabel ^b   Muasya, A Muthama ^c   Smets, Erik ^a,d   Goetghebeur, Paul ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEUVEN   (Belgium)

^b GHENT UNIVERSITY   (Belgium)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CAPE TOWN   (South Africa)

^d UNIVERSITEIT LEIDEN BRANCH   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CYPERACEAE; SCHOENUS NIGRICANS;

ARTICLE; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; CYPERACEAE; FLOWER; GENETICS; GROWTH, DEVELOPMENT AND AGING; HISTOLOGY; PHYLOGENY; ULTRASTRUCTURE;

CYPERACEAE; FLOWERS; MODELS, GENETIC; PHYLOGENY;

EID: 77953944833     PISSN: 03057364     EISSN: 10958290     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/aob/mcq010     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Bruhl JJ. 1991. Comparative development of some taxonomically critical floral/inflorescence features in Cyperaceae. Australian Journal of Botany 39: 119-127.
2. Bruhl JJ. 1995. Sedge genera of the world: relationships and a new classification of the Cyperaceae. Australian Systematic Botany 8: 125-305.
3. Celakovsky L. 1887. Ueber die ährchenachtige Partial-inflorescenzen der Rhynchosporeen. Berichte der Deutschen Botanischen Gesellschaft V.I: 148-152.
4. Classen-Bockhoff R. 2005. Aspekte, Typifikationsverfahren und Aussagen der Pflanzenmorphologie. In: Wert und Grenzen des Typurs in der botanischen Morphologie. Nümbrecht, Germany: Martina Galunder-Verlag, 31-52.
5. Eiten LT. 1976. Inflorescence units in the Cyperaceae. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 63: 81-112.
6. Goetghebeur P. 1986. Genera Cyperacearum. Een bijdrage tot de kennis van de morfologie, systematiek en fylogenese van de Cyperaceae-genera. PhD thesis, Groep Plantkunde, Rijksuniversiteit Gent, Belgium.
7. Goetghebeur P. 1998. Cyperaceae. In: Kubitzki K. ed. The families and genera of vascular plants, vol. 4. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 141-190.
8. Gould SJ. 2002. The structure of evolutionary theory. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
9. Guarise NJ, Vegetti AC. 2008. The inflorescence structure of Cyperus L. section Luzuloidei Kunth (Cyperaceae). Plant Systematics and Evolution 271: 41-63.
10. Haines RW. 1967. Prophylls and branching in Cyperaceae. Journal of the East African Natural History Society XXVI (1): 51-70.
11. Haines RW, Lye KA. 1983. The sedges and rushes of East Africa. Nairobi: East African National History Society.
12. Kern JH. 1962. New look at some Cyperaceae mainly from the tropical standpoint. Advancement of Science 19: 141-148.
13. Kukkonen I. 1994. Definition of descriptive terms for the Cyperaceae. Annales Botanici Fennici 31: 37-43.
14. Meert M, Goetghebeur P. 1979. Comparative floral morphology of Bisboeckelereae and Cariceae (Cyperaceae) on the basis of the anthoid concept. Bulletin de la Société Royale de Botanique Belge/Bulletin van de Koninklijke Belgische Botanische Vereniging 112: 128-143.
15. Muasya AM, Simpson DA, Verboom GA, et al. 2009. Phylogeny of Cyperaceae based on DNA sequence data: current progress and future prospects. Botanical Review 75: 2-21.
16. Nees von Esenbeck CG. 1835. Uebersicht der Cyperaceengattungen. Linnaea 9: 273-306.
17. Raynal J. 1971. Quelques notes morphologiques sur les Cypéracées. Mitteilungen der Botanische Staatssammlung München 10: 589-603.
18. Remane A. 1956. Die Grundlage des naturlichen Systems, der vergleichende Anatomie und der Phylogenetik. Leipzig: Akademische Verlagsgezellschaft.
19. Richards JH, Bruhl JJ, Wilson KL. 2006. Morphology and development of reproductive structures in Exocarya (Cyperaceae, Mapanioideae, Chrysitricheae). American Journal of Botany 93: 1241-1250.
20. Simpson DA, Muasya AM, Alves M, et al. 2007. Phylogeny of Cyperaceae based on DNA sequence data-a new rbcL analysis. Aliso 23: 72-83.
21. Smith DL. 1967. The experimental control of inflorescence development in Carex. Annals of Botany 31: 19-29.
22. Timonen T. 1993. Synflorescence structure of some hetero-, homo-, and monostachyae sedges (Carex, Cyperaceae). Annales Botanici Fennici 30: 21-42.
23. Timonen T. 1998. Inflorescence structure in the sedge tribe Cariceae (Cyperaceae). Publications in Botany from the University of Helsinki 26: 1-35.
24. Troll W. 1959. Allgemeine Botanik. Stuttgart: Ferdinand Enke Verlag.
25. Vegetti AC. 2003. Synflorescence typology in Cyperaceae. Annales Botanici Fennici 40: 35-46.
26. Vrijdaghs A. 2006. A floral ontogenetic approach to homology questions in non-mapanioid Cyperaceae/Een bloemontogenetische benadering van homologie-vraagstukken bij niet mapaniöde Cyperaceae. PhD thesis, Laboratory of Plant Systematics, K.U. Leuven, Belgium.
27. Vrijdaghs A, Goetghebeur P, Smets E, Caris P. 2003. The orientation of the developing gynoecium of Cladium mariscus (L.) Pohl. In: Bayer C, Dressler S, Schneider J, Zizka G. eds. 16th International Symposium Biodiversity and Evolutionary Biology, 17th International Senckenberg Conference. Frankfurt am Main: Palmarum Hortus Francofurtensis, Abstracts.
28. Vrijdaghs A, Goetghebeur P, Smets E, Caris P. 2007. The Schoenus spikelet: a rhipidium? A floral ontogenetic answer. Aliso 23, 204-209.
29. Vrijdaghs A, Muasya AM, Goetghebeur P, Caris P, Nagels A, Smets E. 2009. A floral ontogenetic approach to homology questions within the Cyperoideae (Cyperaceae). Botanical Review 75: 30-51.
30. Weberling F. 1992. Morphology of flowers and inflorescences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
31. Weigel D, Meyerowitz EM. 1994. The ABCs of floral homeotic genes. Cell 78: 203-209.
32. Zhang X, Wilson KL, Bruhl JJ. 2004. Sympodial structure of spikelets in the tribe Schoeneae (Cyperaceae). American Journal of Botany 91: 24-3.