A Comparison of Floral Structures of Anisophylleaceae and Cunoniaceae and the Problem of their Systematic Position

Matthews, Merran L.; Endress, Peter K.; Schönenberger, Jürg; Friis, Else Marie

doi:10.1006/anbo.2001.1494

Cited by 49 publications

(114 citation statements)

References 57 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

110

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, lack of phylogenetic resolution between the orders of rosids (APG, 2003) does not (yet) allow for sensible character‐state mapping on phylogenetic trees. This study forms part of a larger project on comparative floral structure in rosids (Matthews et al ., 2001; Schönenberger et al ., 2001; Matthews & Endress, 2002, 2004, 2005).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative floral structure and systematics in Celastrales (Celastraceae, Parnassiaceae, Lepidobotryaceae)

Matthews

Endress

2005

Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society

101

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Floral morphology, anatomy and histology in the newly circumscribed order Celastrales, comprising Celastraceae, Parnassiaceae and Lepidobotryaceae are studied comparatively. Several genera of Celastraceae and Lepidobotrys (Lepidobotryaceae) were studied for the first time in this respect. Celastraceae are well supported as a group by floral structure (including genera that were in separate families in earlier classifications); they have dorsally bulged-up locules (and thus apical septa) and contain oxalate druses in their floral tissues. The group of Celastraceae and Parnassiaceae is also well supported. They share completely syncarpous gynoecia with commissural stigmatic lobes (and strong concomitant development of the commissural vascular bundles but weak median carpel bundles), only weakly crassinucellar or incompletely tenuinucellar ovules with an endothelium, partly fringed sepals and petals, protandry in bisexual flowers combined with herkogamy by the movement of stamens and anther abscission, and stamens fused with the ovary. In contrast, Lepidobotryaceae are more distant from the other two families, sharing only a handful of features with Celastraceae (not Parnassiaceae), such as pseudohermaphroditic flowers, united stamen bases forming a collar around the gynoecium and seeds with a conspicuous aril. However, all three families together are also somewhat supported as a group and share petals that are not retarded in late floral bud development, 3-carpellate gynoecia, ventral slits of carpels closed by long interlocking epidermal cells and pollen tube transmitting tissue encompassing several cell layers, both integuments usually more than two cell layers thick, and only weak or lacking floral indumentum. In some molecular analyses Celastrales form an unsupported clade with Malpighiales and Oxalidales. This association is supported by floral structure, especially between Celastrales and Malpighiales. Among Celastrales, Lepidobotryaceae especially share special features with Malpighiales, including a diplostemonous androecium with ten fertile stamens, epitropous ovules with an obturator and strong vascularization around the chalaza.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative floral structure and systematics in Celastrales (Celastraceae, Parnassiaceae, Lepidobotryaceae)

Matthews

Endress

2005

Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society

101

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The occurrence of mucilaginous cells has been little studied in flowers despite its potential systematic value for the groups in which they occur (see Matthews et al 2001;Matthews & Endress 2002;. The presence of this cell type, known as 'special mucilage cells' (according to Matthew & Endress 2006), has been seldom reported in the literature and, in Leguminosae, it was previously recorded in the sepals of Amherstia species (Caesalpinioideae s.l.).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Beyond pollination: diversity of secretory structures during flower development in different legume lineages

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Floral secretory structures are usually associated with the attraction of pollinators, but may also play an important role in the mechanisms of plant protection. Th is study aimed to show the diversity of secretory structures present in the developing fl owers of 15 legume species belonging to diff erent clades and to associate them with functions other than the pollinator attraction. Buds, fl owers and developing axis of infl orescence were processed for surface, histological, and ultrastructural analyses. Th e species investigated displayed a wide diversity of secretory structures in developing fl owers such as phenolic cells and/or tissues, mucilaginous cells, secretory cavities, secretory trichomes and colleters. Each type of secretory structure exhibited variation in morphology and location in the fl ower and/or axis of infl orescence depending on the species. Special mucilage cells, secretory cavities, secretory trichomes and colleters have great potential for comparative morphological studies due to their diversity of forms or restricted occurrence to certain taxa, contributing to a more robust morphological data base for the new clades emerging in Leguminosae. Th e scarcity of reports about fl oral secretory structures of Leguminosae seems to be more related to defi cient sampling than to the absence of such structures in the group, which highlights the need for further investigation.

show abstract

“…In the studies on rosids in my lab, Merran Matthews and Julien Bachelier made detailed analyses of the gynoecium structure in larger clades and showed that all these aspects just mentioned, the topography of the inner morphological surface, anatomy and histology , are of systematic interest (Matthews et al, 2001 ;Matthews and Endress, 2002, 2004, 2005aBachelier and Endress, 2007. For related studies on other angiosperms , see, e.g.…”

Section: Morphology Of Syncarpous Gynoeciamentioning

confidence: 99%

Changing views of flower evolution and new questions

Endress¹

2011

Flowers on the Tree of Life

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A Comparison of Floral Structures of Anisophylleaceae and Cunoniaceae and the Problem of their Systematic Position

Cited by 49 publications

References 57 publications

Comparative floral structure and systematics in Celastrales (Celastraceae, Parnassiaceae, Lepidobotryaceae)

Comparative floral structure and systematics in Celastrales (Celastraceae, Parnassiaceae, Lepidobotryaceae)

Beyond pollination: diversity of secretory structures during flower development in different legume lineages

Changing views of flower evolution and new questions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About