What does it take to resolve relationships and to identify species with molecular markers? An example from the epiphytic Rhipsalideae (Cactaceae)

American Journal of Botany

Volumn 98, Issue 9, 2011, Pages 1549-1572

  Korotkova, Nadja ^a   Borsch, Thomas ^b   Quandt, Dietmar ^a   Taylor, Nigel P ^c   Müller, Kai F ^d   Barthlott, Wilhelm ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BONN   (Germany)

^b FREIE UNIVERSITÄT BERLIN   (Germany)

^c ROYAL BOTANIC GARDENS   (United Kingdom)

^d UNIVERSITY OF MÜNSTER   (Germany)

Author keywords

Cactaceae; DNA barcoding; Hatiora; Inversion; Lepismium; Rhipsalidopsis; Rhipsalis; Schlumbergera; Specieslevel phylogeny; Taxonomy

Indexed keywords

PLANT DNA; PRIMER DNA;

BIOMARKER; CACTUS; CLADISTICS; EPIPHYTE; GENE EXPRESSION; GENETIC ANALYSIS; GENOMICS; IDENTIFICATION METHOD; MOLECULAR ANALYSIS; PHYLOGENY; PLASTID; RELATEDNESS; TAXONOMY;

ARTICLE; CACTACEAE; GENETIC MARKER; GENETICS; PLANT GENE;

CACTACEAE; DNA PRIMERS; DNA, PLANT; GENES, PLANT; GENETIC MARKERS;

CACTACEAE; HATIORA; LEPISMIUM; OTUS; RHIPSALIDEAE; RHIPSALIDOPSIS; RHIPSALIS; SCHLUMBERGERA;

EID: 84856100601     PISSN: 00029122     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3732/ajb.1000502     Document Type: Article

References (131)

1. Akaike, H. 1974. A new look at the statistical model identification. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 19: 716-723.
2. Anderson, E. F. 2001. The cactus family. Timber Press, Portland, Oregon, USA.
3. Applequist, W. L., and R. S. Wallace. 2002. Deletions in the plastid trnT-trnL intergenic spacer define clades within Cactaceae subfamily Cactoideae. Plant Systematics and Evolution 231: 153-162.
4. Arias, S., T. Terrazas, H. J. Arreola-Nava, M. Vazquez-Sanchez, and K. M. Cameron. 2005. Phylogenetic relationships in Peniocereus (Cactaceae) inferred from plastid DNA sequence data. Journal of Plant Research 118: 317-328.
5. Backeberg, C. 1938. Zur systematischem Übersicht/Diagnosen neuer Gattungen und Untergattungen. Blätter für Kakteenforschung 6.
6. Backeberg, C. 1942. Zur Geschichte der Kakteen im Verlauf der Entwicklung des amerikanischen Kontinentes. Verlag J. Neumann, Neudamm, Germany.
7. Backeberg, C. 1959. Die Cactaceae. Handbuch der Kakteenkunde. Band II Cereoideae (Hylocereae-Cereae). VEB Gustav Fischer Verlag, Jena, Germany.
8. Backeberg, C. 1966. Das Kakteenlexikon. Enumeratio diagnostica Cactacearum. VEB Gustav Fischer Verlag, Jena.
9. Bárcenas, R. T., C. Yesson, and J. A. Hawkins. 2011. Molecular systematics of the Cactaceae. Cladistics 27: 1-20.
10. Barfuss, M. H. J., R. Samuel, W. Till, and T. F. Stuessy. 2005. Phylogenetic relationships in subfamily Tillandsioideae (Bromeliaceae) based on DNA sequence data from seven plastid regions. American Journal of Botany 92: 337-351.
11. Barthlott, W. 1974. Der Rhipsalis micrantha (HBK) DC.-Komplex in Ecuador und Peru. Tropische und subtropische Pflanzenwelt 10: 645-668.
12. Barthlott, W. 1979. Cacti. Stanley Thornes, Cheltenham, UK.
13. Barthlott, W. 1983. Biogeography and evolution in neo-and palaeotropical Rhipsalinae (Cactaceae). In K. Kubitzki [ed.], Proceedings of International Symposium on Dispersal and Distribution, Sonderband naturwissenschaftlicher Verlag Hamburg 7: 241-248.
14. Barthlott, W. 1987a. New names in Rhipsalidinae (Cactaceae). Bradleya 5: 97-100.
15. Barthlott, W. 1987b. Tribe Rhipsalideae DC. In A. J. S. McMillan [ed.], Epiphytes, vol. 11, 115.
16. Barthlott, W., and D. Hunt. 1993. Cactaceae. In K. Kubitzki [ed.], The families and genera of vascular plants, Vol. II, 161-197. Springer, Berlin, Germany.
17. Barthlott, W., and A. J. S. McMillan. 1978. A new species of Schlumbergera (Cactaceae). Cactus and Succulent Journal (U.S.) L: 31-35.
18. Barthlott, W., and W. Rauh. 1975. Notes on the morphology, palynology, and evolution of the genus Schlumbergera Lemaire (Cactaceae). Cactus and Succulent Journal (supplemental volume): 5-21.
19. Barthlott, W., and N. P. Taylor. 1995. Notes towards a monograph of Rhipsalideae (Cactaceae). Bradleya 13: 43-79.
20. Berger, A. 1926. Die Entwicklungslinien der Kakteen. Verlag Gustav Fischer, Jena, Germany.
21. Borsch, T., K. W. Hilu, D. Quandt, V. Wilde, C. Neinhuis, and W. Barthlott. 2003. Noncoding plastid trnT-trnF sequences reveal a well resolved phylogeny of basal angiosperms. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 16: 558-576.
22. Borsch, T., T. Ortuño Limarino, and M. H. Nee. 2011. Phylogenetics of the neotropical liana genus Pedersenia (Amaranthaceae: Gomphrenoideae) and discovery of a new species from Bolivia based on molecules and morphology. Willdenowia 41: 5-14.
23. Borsch, T., K. W. Hilu, J. H. Wiersema, C. Lohne, W. Barthlott, and V. Wilde. 2007. Phylogeny of Nymphaea (Nymphaeaceae): Evidence from substitutions and microstructural changes in the chloroplast trnT-trnF region. International Journal of Plant Sciences 168: 639-671.
24. Borsch, T., and D. Quandt. 2009. Mutational dynamics and phylogenetic utility of noncoding chloroplast DNA. Plant Systematics and Evolution 282: 169-199.
25. Britton, N. L., and J. N. Rose. 1923. Subtribe 8. Rhipsalidanae, The Cactaceae. Descriptions and illustrations of plants of the cactus family, 208-247. Carnegie Institute, Washington, D.C., USA.
26. Butterworth, C. A., J. H. Cota-Sanchez, and R. S. Wallace. 2002. Molecular systematics of Tribe Cacteae (Cactaceae: Cactoideae): A phylogeny based on rpl16 intron sequence variation. Systematic Botany 27: 257-270.
27. Butterworth, C. A., and R. S. Wallace. 2004. Phylogenetic studies of Mammillaria (Cactaceae): Insights from chloroplast sequence variation and hypothesis testing using the parametric bootstrap. American Journal of Botany 91: 1086-1098.
28. Buxbaum, F. 1962. Das phylogenetische System den Cactaceae. In H. Krainz [ed.], Die Kakteen, System: 1-6. Franckh'she Verlagshandlung, Stuttgart, Germany.
29. Buxbaum, F. 1967. Der gegenwärtige Stand der stammesgeschichtlichen Erforschung der Kakteen. Kakteen und andere Sukkulenten 18: 6-9.
30. Buxbaum, F. 1970a. Gattung Rhipsalis. In H. Krainz [ed.], Die Kakteen, C IV e. Franckh'she, Stuttgart, Germany.
31. Buxbaum, F. 1970b. Gattung Hatiora. In H. Krainz [ed.], Die Kakteen, C II c. Franckh'she, Stuttgart, Germany.
32. Calvente, A., D. C. Zappi, F. Forest, and L. G. Lohmann. 2011. Molecular phylogeny of tribe Rhipsalideae (Cactaceae) and taxonomic implications for Schlumbergera and Hatiora. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 58: 456-468.
33. Calviño, C. I., and S. R. Downie. 2007. Circumscription and phylogeny of Apiaceae subfamily Saniculoideae based on chloroplast DNA sequences. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 44: 175-191.
34. CBOL Plant Working Group. 2009. A DNA barcode for land plants. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 106: 12794-12797.
35. Chase, M. W., R. S. Cowan, P. M. Hollingsworth, C. van den Berg, S. Madriñán, G. Petersen, O. Seberg, et al. 2007. A proposal for a standardised protocol to barcode all land plants. Taxon 56: 295-299.
36. Clopper, C., and E. S. Pearson. 1934. The use of confidence or fiducial limits illustrated in the case of the binomial. Biometrika 26: 404-413.
37. Cowan, R. S., M. W. Chase, W. J. Kress, and V. Savolainen. 2006. 300,000 species to identify: problems, progress, and prospects in DNA barcoding of land plants. Taxon 55: 611-616.
38. Croizat, L. 1952. Manual of phytogeography or an account of plant-dispersal throughout the world. Uitgeverij Dr. W. Junk, The Hague, Netherlands.
39. Cuénoud, P., V. Savolainen, L. W. Chatrou, M. Powell, R. J. Grayer, and M. W. Chase. 2002. Molecular phylogenetics of Caryophyllales based on nuclear 18S rDNA and plastid rbcL, atpB, and matK DNA sequences. American Journal of Botany 89: 132-144.
40. De Candolle, A. P. 1828. Prodromus systematis naturalis regni vegetabilis. Treuttel & Wuertz, Paris, France.
41. De Fatima Freitas, M., A. De Moraes Calvente, and J. M. A. Braga. 2009. A new species of Rhipsalis (Cactaceae) from Brazil. Systematic Botany 34: 505-509.
42. Devey, D. S., M. W. Chase, and J. J. Clarkson. 2009. A stuttering start to plant DNA barcoding: Microsatellites present a previously overlooked problem in non-coding plastid regions. Taxon 58: 7-15.
43. Ebach, M. C., and C. Holdredge. 2005. More taxonomy, not barcoding. BioScience 55: 823-824.
44. Edwards, E. J., R. Nyffeler, and M. J. Donoghue. 2005. Basal cactus phylogeny: Implications of Pereskia (Cactaceae) paraphyly for the transition to the cactus life form. American Journal of Botany 92: 1177-1188.
45. Farris, J. S., V. A. Albert, M. Källersjö, D. Lipscomb, and A. G. Kluge. 1996. Parsimony jackknifing outperforms neighbor-joining. Cladistics 12: 99-124.
46. Fazekas, A. J., K. S. Burgess, P. R. Kesanakurti, S. W. Graham, S. G. Newmaster, B. C. Husband, D. M. Percy, et al. 2008. Multiple multilocus DNA barcodes from the plastid genome discriminate plant species equally well. PLoS ONE 3: e2802.
47. Fleischmann, A., B. Schäferhoff, G. Heubl, F. Rivadavia, W. Barthlott, and K. F. Müller. 2010. Phylogenetics and character evolution in the carnivorous plant genus Genlisea A. St.-Hil. (Lentibulariaceae). Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 56: 768-783.
48. Fontaneto, D., E. A. Hernious, C. Boschetti, M. Caprioli, G. Melone, C. Ricci, and T. G. Barraclough. 2007. Independently evolving species in asexual bdelloid rotifers. PLoS Biology 5: e87.
49. Ford, C. S., K. L. Ayres, N. Toomey, N. Haider, J. A. Stahl, L. J. Kelly, N. Wikström, P. M. Hollingsworth, et al. 2009. Selection of candidate coding DNA barcoding regions for use on land plants. Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society 159: 1-11.
50. Givnish, T. J., K. C. Millam, P. E. Berry, and K. J. Sytsma. 2007. Phylogeny, adaptive radiation, and historical biogeography of Bromeliaceae inferred from ndhF sequence data. Aliso 23: 3-26.
51. Givnish, T. J., K. C. Millam, T. M. Evans, J. C. Hall, J. C. Pires, P. E. Berry, and K. J. Sytsma. 2004. Ancient vicariance or recent longdistance dispersal? Inferences about phylogeny and South American-African disjunctions in Rapateaceae and Bromeliaceae based on ndhF sequence data. International Journal of Plant Sciences 165: S35-S54.
52. Guindon, S., and O. Gascuel. 2003. A simple, fast, and accurate algorithm to estimate large phylogenies by maximum likelihood. Systematic Biology 52: 696-704.
53. Hebert, P. D. N., A. Cywinska, S. L. Ball, and J. R. DeWaard. 2003. Biological identifications through DNA barcodes. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, B, Biological Sciences 270: 313-321.
54. Hernández-Hernández, T., H. M. Hernández, J. A. De-Nova, R. Puente, L. E. Eguiarte, and S. Magallón. 2011. Phylogenetic relationships and evolution of growth form in Cactaceae (Caryophyllales, Eudicotyledoneae). American Journal of Botany 98: 44-61.
55. Hilu, K. W., and H. P. Liang. 1997. The matK gene: Sequence variation and application in plant systematics. American Journal of Botany 84: 830-839.
56. Hollingsworth, M. L., A. Andra Clark, L. L. Forrest, J. Richardson, R. T. Pennington, D. G. Long, R. Cowan, M. W. Chase, et al. 2009. Selecting barcoding loci for plants: Evaluation of seven candidate loci with species-level sampling in three divergent groups of land plants. Molecular Ecology Resources 9: 439-457.
57. Huelsenbeck, J. P., and F. Ronquist. 2001. MrBayes: Bayesian inference of phylogenetic trees. Bioinformatics 17: 754-755.
58. Hunt, D. 1967. Cactaceae. In J. Hutchinson [ed.], The genera of flowering plants, Dicotyledones, vol. II. Clarendon Press, Oxford, UK.
59. Hunt, D. 1969. Contributions to the Flora of Tropical America: LXXVII: A synopsis of Schlumbergera Lem. (Cactaceae). Kew Bulletin 23: 255-263.
60. Hunt, D. 1999. CITES Cactaceae checklist. Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, UK.
61. Hunt, D. 2006. The new cactus lexicon. dh Books, Milborne Port, UK.
62. Jakob, S. S., and F. R. Blattner. 2006. A chloroplast genealogy of Hordeum (Poaceae): Long term persisting haplotypes, incomplete lineage sorting, regional extinction, and the consequences for phylogenetic inference. Molecular Biology and Evolution 23: 1602-1612.
63. Johnson, L. A., and D. E. Soltis. 1995. Phylogenetic inference in Saxifragaceae s. str. and Gilia (Polemoniaceae) using matK sequences. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 82: 149-175.
64. Kelchner, S. A. 2000. The evolution of non-coding chloroplast DNA and its application in plant systematics. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 87: 482-498.
65. Kelchner, S. A. 2002. Group II introns as phylogenetic tools: Structure, function, and evolutionary constraints. American Journal of Botany 89: 1651-1669.
66. Kelchner, S. A., and L. G. Clark. 1997. Molecular evolution and phylogenetic utility of the chloroplast rpl16 intron in Chusquea and the Bambusoideae (Poaceae). Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 8: 385-397.
67. Kelchner, S. A., and J. F. Wendel. 1996. Hairpins create minute inversions in non-coding regions of chloroplast DNA. Current Genetics 30: 259-262.
68. Kim, S.-C., D. J. Crawford, R. K. Jansen, and A. Santos-Guerra. 1999. The use of a non-coding region of chloroplast DNA in phylogenetic studies of the subtribe of the subtribe Sonchinae (Asteraceae: Lactuceae). Plant Systematics and Evolution 215: 85-99.
69. Kluge, A. G. 1989. A concern for evidence and a phylogenetic hypothesis for relationships among Epicrates (Boidae, Serpentes). Systematic Zoology 38: 7-25.
70. Korotkova, N., L. Zabel, D. Quandt, and W. Barthlott. 2010. A phylogenetic analysis of Pfeiffera and the reinstatement of Lymanbensonia as an independently evolved lineage of epiphytic Cactaceae within a new tribe Lymanbensonieae. Willdenowia 40: 151-171.
71. Kress, W. J., and D. L. Erickson. 2007. A two-locus global DNA barcode for land plants: The coding rbcL gene complements the noncoding trnH-psbA spacer region. PLoS ONE 2: e508.
72. Kress, W. J., K. J. Wurdack, E. A. Zimmer, L. A. Weigt, and D. H. Janzen. 2005. Use of DNA barcodes to identify flowering plants. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 102: 8369-8374.
73. Krug, M. 2010. Attributing differences in phylogenetic structure to molecular structural elements. Diploma thesis, Nees Institute for Biodiversity of Plants, University of Bonn, Germany.
74. Lahaye, R. M. van der Bank, D. Bogarin, J. Warner, F. Pupulin, G. Gigot, O. Maurin, et al. 2008. DNA barcoding the floras of biodiversity hotspots. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 105: 2923-2928.
75. Lewis, L. A., B. D. Mischler, And R. Vilgays. 1997. Phylogenetic relationships of the liverworts (Hepaticae), a basal embryophyte lineage, inferred from nucleotide sequence data of the chloroplast gene rbcL. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 7: 377-393.
76. Little, D. P. 2010. A unified index of sequence quality and contig overlap for DNA barcoding. Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) 26: 2780-2781.
77. Little, D. P., and D. W. Stevenson. 2007. A comparison of algorithms for the identification of specimens using DNA barcodes: Examples from gymnosperms. Cladistics 23: 1-21.
78. Löhne, C., and T. Borsch. 2005. Molecular evolution and phylogenetic utility of the petD group II intron: A case study in basal angiosperms. Molecular Biology and Evolution 22: 317-332.
79. Löhne, C., T. Borsch, and J. H. Wiersema. 2007. Phylogenetic analysis of Nymphaeales using fast-evolving and noncoding chloroplast markers. Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society 154: 141-163.
80. Maddison, W. P., and D. R. Maddison. 2009. Mesquite: A modular system for evolutionary analysis, version 2.74. [computer program]. Website http://mesquiteproject.org/mesquite/mesquite.html.
81. Mathews, D. H., M. Zuker, and D. H. Turner. 1996. RNA structure 5.0 [computer program]. Website http://rna.urmc.rochester.edu/ RNAstructure.html.
82. McMillan, A. J. S., and J. F. Horobin. 1995. Christmas cacti: The genus Schlumbergera and its hybrids. D. Hunt, Milborne Port, UK.
83. Meyer, C. P., and G. Paulay. 2005. DNA barcoding: Error rates based on comprehensive sampling. PLoS Biology 3: e422.
84. Monaghan, M. T., R. Wild, M. Elliot, T. Fujisawa, M. Balke, D. J. G. Inward, D. C. Lees, et al. 2009. Accelerated species inventory on Madagascar using coalescent-based models of species delineation. Systematic Biology 58: 298-311.
85. Moran, R. 1953. Taxonomic studies in the Cactaceae. II. Notes on Schlumbergera, Rhipsalidopsis and allied genera. Gentes Herbarium VIII Fascicle IV: 328-345.
86. Morrison, D. 2009. A framework for phylogenetic sequence alignment. Plant Systematics and Evolution 282: 127-149.
87. Müller, J., K. Müller, C. Neinhuis, and D. Quandt. 2005. PhyDE: Phylogenetic Data Editor [computer program]. Website http:// www. phyde.de.
88. Müller, K. 2004. PRAP-Computation of Bremer support for large data sets. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 31: 780-782.
89. Müller, K. 2005a. The efficiency of different search strategies in estimating parsimony jackknife, bootstrap, and Bremer support. BMC Evolutionary Biology 5: 58.
90. Müller, K. 2005b. SeqState: Primer design and sequence statistics for phylogenetic DNA data sets. Applied Bioinformatics 4: 65-69.
91. Müller, K., and T. Borsch. 2005. Phylogenetics of Amaranthaceae based on matK/trnK sequence data-Evidence from parsimony, likelihood, and Bayesian analyses. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 92: 66-102.
92. Müller, K., T. Borsch, and K. W. Hilu. 2006. Phylogenetic utility of rapidly evolving DNA at high taxonomical levels: Contrasting matK, trnT-F, and rbcL in basal angiosperms. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 41: 99-117.
93. Nixon, K. C. 1999. The parsimony ratchet, a new method for rapid parsimony analysis. Cladistics 15: 407-414.
94. Nixon, K. C., and J. M. Carpenter. 1996. On simultaneous analysis. Cladistics 12: 221-242.
95. Nyffeler, R. 2002. Phylogenetic relationships in the cactus family (Cactaceae) based on evidence from trnK/matK and trnL-trnF sequences. American Journal of Botany 89: 312-326.
96. Ocampo, G., and J. T. Columbus. 2010. Molecular phylogenetics of suborder Cactineae (Caryophyllales), including insights into photosynthetic diversification and historical biogeography. American Journal of Botany 97: 1827-1847.
97. Ochoterena, H. 2009. Homology in coding and non-coding DNA sequences: A parsimony perspective. Plant Systematics and Evolution 282: 151-168.
98. Olmstead, R. G., H. J. Michaels, K. M. Scott, and J. D. Palmer. 1992. Monophyly of the asteridae and identification of their major lineages inferred from DNA sequences of rbcL. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 79: 249-265.
99. Pons, I., T. G. Barraclough, J. Gomez-Zurita, A. Cardoso, D. P. Duran, S. Hazell, S. Kamoun, et al. 2006. Sequence-based species delimitation for the DNA taxonomy of undescribed insects. Systematic Biology 55: 595-609.
100. Porembski, S., and W. Barthlott. 1999. Pitcairnia feliciana: The only indigenous African Bromeliaceae. Harvard Papers in Botany 4: 175-184.
101. Posada, D. 2008. jModelTest: Phylogenetic Model Averaging. Molecular Biology and Evolution 25: 1253-1256.
102. Quandt, D., K. Müller, and S. Huttunen. 2003. Characterisation of the chloroplast DNA psbT-H region and the influence of dyad symmetrical elements on phylogenetic reconstructions. Plant Biology 5: 400-410.
103. Quandt, D., and M. Stech. 2004. Molecular evolution and phylogenetic utility of the chloroplast trnT-trnF region in bryophytes. Plant Biology 6: 545-554.
104. R Development Core Team. 2011. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna Austria.
105. Rambaut, A., and A. J. Drummond. 2007. Tracer v1.5 [computer program]. Website http://beast.bio.ed.ac.uk/Tracer.
106. Ritz, C. M., L. Martinss, R. Mecklenburg, V. Goremykin, and F. H. Hellwig. 2007. The molecular phylogeny of Rebutia (Cactaceae) and its allies demonstrates the influence of paleogeography on the evolution of South American mountain cacti. American Journal of Botany 94: 1321-1332.
107. Salm-Dyck, J. Z. 1850. Cacteae in Horto Dyckensi Cultae Anno 1849. Henry & Cohen, Bonn, Germany.
108. Sánchez del-Pino, I., T. Borsch, and T. J. Motley. 2009. trnL-F and rpl16 sequence data and dense taxon sampling reveal monophyly of unilocular anthered Gomphrenoideae (Amaranthaceae) and an improved picture of their internal relationships. Systematic Botany 34: 57-67.
109. 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.
110. Sass, C., D. P. Little, D. W. Stevenson, and C. D. Specht. 2007. Barcoding in the Cycadales: Testing the potential of proposed barcoding markers for species identification of Cycads. PLoS ONE 2: e1154.
111. Schumann, K. M. 1899. Gesamtbeschreibung der Kakteen (Monographia Cactacearum). Neumann, Neudamm, Germany.
112. Seberg, O., and G. Petersen. 2009. How many loci does it take to DNA barcode a Crocus? PLoS ONE 4: e4598.
113. Shaw, J., E. B. Lickey, E. E. Schilling, and R. L. Small. 2007. Comparison of whole chloroplast genome sequences to choose non coding regions for phylogenetic studies in angiosperms: The tortoise and the hare III. American Journal of Botany 94: 275-288.
114. Simmons, M. P., and H. Ochoterena. 2000. Gaps as characters in sequence-based phylogenetic analyses. Systematic Biology 49: 369-381.
115. Simmons, M. P., K. M. Pickett, and M. Miya. 2004. How meaningful are Bayesian support values? Molecular Biology and Evolution 21: 369-381.
116. Steele, P. R., L. M. Friar, L. E. Gilbert, and R. K. Jansen. 2010. Molecular systematics of the neotropical genus Psiguria (Cucurbitaceae): Implications for phylogeny and species identification. American Journal of Botany 97: 156-173.
117. Stöver, B., and K. Müller. 2010. TreeGraph 2: Combining and visualizing evidence from different phylogenetic analyses. BMC Bioinformatics 11: 7.
118. 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.
119. Swofford. D. L. 1998. PAUP*: Phylogenetic analysis using parsimony (*and other methods). Sinauer, Sunderland, Massachussets, USA.
120. Taberlet, P., E. Coissac, F. Pompanon, L. Gielly, C. Miquel, A. Valentini, T. Vermat, et al. 2007. Power and limitations of the chloroplast trnL (UAA) intron for plant DNA barcoding. Nucleic Acids Research 35: e14.
121. Tautz, D., P. Arctander, A. Minelli, R. H. Thomas, and A. P. Vogler. 2003. A plea for DNA taxonomy. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 18: 70-74.
122. Taylor, N. P., and D. C. Zappi. 2004. Cacti of eastern Brazil. Kew Publishing, London, UK.
123. Tesfaye, K., T. Borsch, K. Govers, and E. Bekele. 2007. Characterization of Coffea chloroplast microsatellites and evidence for the recent divergence of C. arabica and C. eugenioides chloroplast genomes. Genome 50: 1112-1129.
124. Vaupel, F. 1925-1926. Die Kakteen. Monographie der Cactaceae. Selfpublished, Berlin, Germany.
125. Wallace, R. S., and A. C. Gibson. 2002. Evolution and Systematics. In P. S. Nobel [ed.], Cacti: Biology and uses, 1-21. University of California Press, Berkeley, California, USA.
126. Whitlock, B. A., A. M. Hale, and P. A. Groff. 2010. Intraspecific inversions pose a challenge for the trnH-psbA plant DNA barcode. PLoS ONE 5: e11533.
127. Wicke, S., and D. Quandt. 2009. Universal primers for the amplification of the plastid trnK/matK region in land plants. Anales del Jardín Botanico de Madrid 66: 285-288.
128. Will, K. W., and D. Rubinoff. 2004. Myth of the molecule: DNA barcodes for species cannot replace morphology for identification and classification. Cladistics 20: 47-55.
129. Worberg, A. 2009. Non-coding and fast-evolving chloroplast genomic regions and their utility for reconstructing evolutionary relationships among eudicots: Towards resolving the radiation of the rosids. Ph.D. dissertation, Nees Institute for Biodiversity of Plants, University of Bonn, Germany.
130. Yang, Z., and B. Rannala. 1997. Bayesian phylogenetic inference using DNA sequences: A Markov chain Monte Carlo method. Molecular Biology and Evolution 14: 717-724.
131. Zhang, J., J. Wang, T. Xia, and S. Zhou. 2009. DNA barcoding: Species delimitation in tree peonies. Science in China, C, Life Sciences 52: 568-578.