Keeping it simple: Flowering plants tend to retain, and revert to, simple leaves

New Phytologist

Volumn 193, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 481-493

  Geeta, R ^a,b   Dávalos, Liliana M ^a   Levy, André ^c   Bohs, Lynn ^d   Lavin, Mathew ^e   Mummenhoff, Klaus ^f   Sinha, Neelima ^g   Wojciechowski, Martin F ^h  

^a STONY BROOK UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF DELHI   (India)

^c INSTITUTO SUPERIOR DE PSICOLOGIA APLICADA   (Portugal)

^d UNIVERSITY OF UTAH   (United States)

^e MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^f UNIVERSITY OF OSNABRÜCK   (Germany)

^g UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^h ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Angiosperm; Character; Complex leaves; Development; Rate of evolution; Reversal; Simple leaves; Stasis

Indexed keywords

BIOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS; DATA SET; DICOTYLEDON; ENVIRONMENTAL FACTOR; EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY; LEAF MORPHOLOGY; MAXIMUM LIKELIHOOD ANALYSIS; PARSIMONY ANALYSIS; PHYLOGENETICS; PHYSIOLOGY;

ANGIOSPERM; ARTICLE; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DATA BASE; EVOLUTION; GENETICS; HISTOLOGY; PHYLOGENY; PLANT LEAF; STATISTICAL MODEL;

ANGIOSPERMS; BIOLOGICAL EVOLUTION; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DATABASES AS TOPIC; LIKELIHOOD FUNCTIONS; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; PHYLOGENY; PLANT LEAVES;

APIALES; FABACEAE; LEPIDIUM; MAGNOLIOPHYTA; PAPAVERACEAE; SAPINDALES; SOLANUM;

EID: 84155164903     PISSN: 0028646X     EISSN: 14698137     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-8137.2011.03951.x     Document Type: Article

References (76)

1. Barkoulas M, Hay A, Kougioumoutzi E, Tsiantis M. 2008. A developmental framework for dissected leaf formation in the Arabidopsis relative Cardamine hirsuta. Nature Genetics 40: 1136-1141.
2. Bharathan G, Goliber TE, Moore C, Kessler S, Pham T, Sinha N. 2002. Homologies in leaf development inferred from KNOXI gene expression. Science 296: 1858-1860.
3. Blein T, Pulido A, Vialette-Guiraud A, Nikovics K, Morin H, Hay A, Johansen IE, Tsiantis M, Laufs P. 2008. A conserved molecular framework for compound leaf development. Science 322: 1835-1839.
4. Bohs L. 2005. Major clades in Solanum based on ndhF sequence data. In: Keating RC, Hollowell VC, Croat TB, eds. A Festschrift for William G. D'Arcy: the legacy of a taxonomist. Monographs in Systematic Botany from the Missouri Botanical Garden, Vol. 104. St. Louis, MO, USA: Missouri Botanical Garden Press, 27-49.
5. Bourque L, Lacroix C. 2011. Lobe-generating centres in the simple leaves of Myriophyllum aquaticum: evidence for KN1-like activity. Annals of Botany 107: 639-651.
6. Bowman JL, Brüggemann H, Lee J-Y, Mummenhoff K. 1999. Evolutionary changes in floral structure within Lepidium L. (Brassicaceae). International Journal of Plant Sciences 160: 917-929.
7. Charlesworth B, Lande R, Slatkin M. 1982. A neo-Darwinian commentary on macroevolution. Evolution 36: 474-498.
8. Collins TM, Wimberger PH, Naylor GJP. 1994. Compositional bias, character-state bias, and character-state reconstruction using parsimony. Systematic Biology 4: 482-496.
9. Cronquist A. 1988. The evolution and classification of flowering plants. New York, NY, USA: The New York Botanical Garden.
10. Cunningham CW, Omland KE, Oakley TH. 1998. Reconstructing ancestral character states: a critical reappraisal. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 13: 361-366.
11. Dengler NG, Dengler RE, Kaplan DR. 1982. The mechanism of plication inception in palm leaves - histogenetic observations on the palmate leaf of Rhapis excelsa. Canadian Journal of Botany 60: 2999-3016.
12. Dierschke T, Mandáková T, Lysak M, Mummenhoff K. 2009. A bicontinental origin of polyploid Australian/New Zealand Lepidium species (Brassicaceae): evidence from genomic in situ hybridization (GISH). Annals of Botany 104: 681-688.
13. Downie SR, Ramanath S, Katz-Downie DS, Llanas E. 1998. Molecular systematics of Apiaceae subfamily Apioideae: phylogenetic analyses of nuclear ribosomal DNA internal transcribed spacer and plastid rpoC1 intron sequences. American Journal of Botany 85: 563-591.
14. Doyle JA. 2007. Systematic value and evolution of leaf architecture across the angiosperms in light of molecular phylogenetic analyses. Courier Forschungsinstitut Senckenberg 258: 21-37.
15. Doyle JA, Endress PK. 2000. Morphological phylogenetic analysis of basal angiosperms: comparison and combination with molecular data. International Journal of Plant Science 161: S121-S153.
16. Eames AJ. 1961. Morphology of the angiosperms. New York, NY, USA: McGraw-Hill.
17. Efroni I, Eshed Y, Lifschitz E. 2010. Morphogenesis of simple and compound leaves: a critical review. The Plant Cell 22: 1019-1032.
18. Ekman S, Andersen HL, Wedin M. 2008. The limitations of ancestral state reconstruction and the evolution of the ascus in the Lecanorales (lichenized Ascomycota). Systematic Biology 57: 141-156.
19. Ellis B, Daly D, Hickey LJ, Johnson KR, Mitchell J, Wilf P, Wing SL. 2009. Manual of leaf architecture. Ithaca, NY, USA: Cornell University Press.
20. Esau K. 1965. Plant anatomy. New York, NY, USA: John Wiley.
21. Estes S, Arnold SJ. 2007. Resolving the paradox of stasis: models with stabilizing selection explain evolutionary divergence on all timescales. American Naturalist 169: 227-244.
22. Futuyma DJ. 2010. Evolutionary constraints and ecological consequences. Evolution 64: 1865-1884.
23. Gadek PA, Fernando ES, Quinn CJ, Hoot SB, Terrazas T, Sheahan MC, Chase MW. 1996. Sapindales: molecular delimitation and infraordinal groups. American Journal of Botany 83: 802-811.
24. Givnish TJ. 1987. Comparative studies of leaf form - assessing the relative roles of selective pressures and phylogenetic constraints. New Phytologist 106: 131-160.
25. Gleissberg S, Kadereit JW. 1999. Evolution of leaf morphogenesis: evidence from developmental and phylogenetic data in Papaveraceae. International Journal of Plant Science 160: 787-794.
26. Gurevitch J, Schuepp PH. 1990. Boundary-layer properties of highly dissected leaves: an investigation using an electrochemical fluid tunnel. Plant, Cell & Environment 13: 783-792.
27. Hagemann W, Gleissberg S. 1996. Organogenetic capacity of leaves: the significance of marginal blastozones in angiosperms. Plant Systematics and Evolution 199: 121-152.
28. Harmon LJ, Weir JT, Brock CD, Glor RE, Challenger W. 2008. Geiger: investigating evolutionary radiations. Bioinformatics 24: 129-131.
29. Hay A, Tsiantis M. 2006. The genetic basis for differences in leaf form between Arabidopsis thaliana and its wild relative Cardamine hirsuta. Nature Genetics 38: 942-947.
30. Hay A, Tsiantis M. 2010. KNOX genes: versatile regulators of plant development and diversity. Development 137: 3153-3165.
31. Hickey LJ. 1973. Classification of the architecture of dicotyledonous leaves. American Journal of Botany 60: 17-33.
32. Hickey LJ, Doyle JA. 1977. Early Cretaceous fossil evidence for angiosperm evolution. Botanical Review 43: 3-104.
33. Hildebrand F, Meyer A, Eyre-Walker A. 2010. Evidence of selection upon genomic GC content in bacteria. PloS Genetics. 6: Article Number: e1001107. doi:.
34. Hoot SB, Kadereit JW, Blattner FW, Jork KB, Schwarzbach AE, Crane PR. 1997. Data congruence and phylogeny of the Papaveraceae s.l. based on four datasets: atpB and rbcL sequences, trnK restriction sites, and morphological characters. Systematic Botany 22: 575-590.
35. Huelsenbeck JP, Ronquist F. 2001. MrBayes: Bayesian inference of phylogeny. Bioinformatics 17: 754-755.
36. Jones CS, Bakker FT, Schlichting CD, Nicotra AB. 2009. Leaf shape evolution in the South African genus Pelargonium L' Her. (Geraniaceae). Evolution 63: 479-497.
37. Kaplan DR. 1975. Comparative developmental evaluation of the morphology of unifacial leaves in the monocotyledons. Botanisches Jahrbuecher fuer Systematik 95: 1-105.
38. Kaplan DR. 2001. Fundamental concepts of leaf morphology and morphogenesis: a contribution to the interpretation of molecular genetic mutants. International Journal of Plant Sciences 162: 465-474.
39. Kaplan DR, Dengler NG, Dengler RE. 1982. The mechanism of plication inception in palm leaves - problem and developmental morphology. Canadian Journal of Botany 60: 2939-2975.
40. Lacroix CR, Sattler R. 1994. Expression of shoot features in early leaf development of Murraya paniculata (Rutaceae). Canadian Journal of Botany 72: 678-687.
41. Lee J-Y, Mummenhoff K, Bowman JL. 2002. Alloploidization and evolution of species with reduced floral structures in Lepidium L. (Brassicaceae). Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 99: 16835-16840.
42. Mabberley DJ. 1997. The plant-book. A portable dictionary of plants, their classifications and uses, 2nd edn. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
43. Maddison D, Maddison W. 2005. MacClade 4.08. Sunderland, MA, USA: Sinauer Associates.
44. Marks CO, Lechowicz MJ. 2006. Alternative designs and the evolution of functional diversity. American Naturalist 167: 55-66.
45. Mummenhoff K, Brüggemann H, Bowman JL. 2001. Chloroplast DNA phylogeny and biogeography of Lepidium (Brassicaceae). American Journal of Botany 88: 2051-2063.
46. Mummenhoff K, Linder P, Friesen N, Bowman JL, Lee J-Y, Franzke A. 2004. Molecular evidence for bicontinental hybridogenous genomic constitution in Lepidium sensu stricto (Brassicaceae) species from Australia and New Zealand. American Journal of Botany 91: 254-261.
47. Niklas KJ. 1994. Morphological evolution through complex domains of fitness. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 91: 6772-6779.
48. Nishimura A, Tamaoki M, Sato Y, Matsuoka M. 1999. The expression of tobacco knotted1-type class1 homeobox genes correspond to regions predicted by the cytohistological zonation model. Plant Journal 18: 337-347.
49. Nobel PS. 1983. Biophysical plant physiology and ecology. San Francisco, CA, USA: W. H. Freeman.
50. 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 Series B, Biological Sciences 255: 37-45.
51. Pagel M. 1997. Inferring evolutionary processes from phylogenies. Zoologica Scripta 26: 331-348.
52. Pagel M, Meade A, Barker D. 2004. Bayesian estimation of ancestral character states on phylogenies. Systematic Biology 53: 673-684.
53. Paradis E, Claude J, Strimmer K. 2004. Ape: analyses of phylogenetics and evolution in r language. Bioinformatics 20: 289-290.
54. Peppe DJ, Royer DL, Cariglino B, Oliver SY, Newman S, Leight E, Enikolopov G, Fernandez-Burgos M, Herrera F, Adams JM et al. 2011. Sensitivity of leaf size and shape to climate: global patterns and paleoclimatic applications. New Phytologist 190: 724-739.
55. Piazza P, Bailey CD, Cartolano M, Krieger J, Cao J, Ossowski S, Schneeberger K, He F, de Meaux J, Hall N et al. 2010. Arabidopsis thaliana leaf form evolved via loss of KNOX expression in leaves in association with a selective sweep. Current Biology 20: 2223-2228.
56. Posada D, Crandall KA. 1998. Modeltest: testing the model of DNA substitution. Bioinformatics 14: 817-818.
57. R Development Core Team. 2010. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
58. Rannala B, Yang Z. 1996. Probability distribution of molecular evolutionary trees: a new method of phylogenetic inference. Journal of Molecular Evolution 43: 304-311.
59. Ree RH, Donoghue MJ. 1998. Step matrices and the interpretation of homoplasy. Systematic Biology 47: 582-588.
60. Royer DL, Wilf P, Janesko DA, Kowalski EA, Dilcher DL. 2005. Correlations of climate and plant ecology to leaf size and shape: potential proxies for the fossil record. American Journal of Botany 92: 1141-1151.
61. Sakamoto Y, Ishiguro M, Kitagawa G. 1986. Akaike information criterion statistics. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: D. Reidel.
62. Sanderson MJ. 1993. Reversibility in evolution: a maximum likelihood approach to character gain/loss bias in phylogenies. Evolution 47: 236-252.
63. Sattler R, Rutishauser R. 1997. The fundamental relevance of morphology and morphogenesis to plant research. Annals of Botany 80: 571-582.
64. Schluter D, Price T, Mooers AO, Ludwig D. 1997. Likelihood of ancestor states in adaptive radiation. Evolution 51: 1699-1711.
65. Shapiro SS, Wilk MB. 1965. An analysis of variance test for normality (complete samples). Biometrika 52: 591-611.
66. Sinha N. 1997. Simple and compound leaves: reduction or multiplication? Trends in Plant Science 2: 396-402.
67. Soltis DE, Soltis PS, Chase MW, Mort ME, Albach DC, Zanis M, Savolainen V, Hahn WH, Hoot SB, Fay M. 2000. Angiosperm phylogeny inferred from 18S rDNA, rbcL, and atpB sequences. Botanical Journal of the Linnaean Society 133: 381-461.
68. Soltis PS, Soltis DE, Chase MW. 1999. Angiosperm phylogeny inferred from multiple genes as a tool for comparative biology. Nature 402: 402-405.
69. Stoltzfus A. 2006. Mutation-biased adaptation in a protein NK model. Molecular Biology and Evolution 23: 1852-1862.
70. Swofford DL. 1998. PAUP: phylogenetic analysis using parsimony (*and other methods), Version 4.0d64 ed. Sunderland, MA, USA: Sinauer Associates, Inc. Publishers.
71. Vogel S. 1968. "Sun leaves" and "shade leaves": differences in convective heat dissipation. Ecology 49: 1203-1204.
72. Wagner GP, Stadler PF. 2003. Quasi-independence, homology and the unity of type: a topological theory of characters. Journal of Theoretical Biology 220: 505-527.
73. Wernegreen JJ, Funk DJ. 2004. Mutation exposed: a neutral explanation for extreme base composition of an endosymbiont genome. Journal of Molecular Evolution 59: 849-858.
74. Wiemann MC, Manchester SR, Dilcher DL, Hinojosa LF, Wheeler EA. 1998. Estimation of temperature and precipitation from morphological characters of dicotyledonous leaves. American Journal of Botany 85: 1796-1802.
75. Wojciechowski MF, Lavin M, Sanderson MJ. 2004. A phylogeny of legumes (Leguminosae) based on analysis of the plastid matK gene resolves many well-supported subclades within the family. American Journal of Botany 91: 1846-1862.
76. Wolfe JA. 1995. Paleoclimatic estimates from Tertiary leaf assemblages. Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences 23: 119-142.