Actes du Congrés international de botanique tenu a Paris en août 1867, sous les auspices de la Société botanique de France

Fournier, Eugène

doi:10.5962/bhl.title.11026

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The association of Balanophoraceae with Santalales dates to the middle of the 19th century. Eichler (1867) provided detailed descriptions and illustrations of female flowers among various genera of Balanophoraceae and Cynomoriaceae. He stated that Cynomoriaceae was allied with Hippuris L. (Saxifragales: Halo ragaceae), in agreement with Hooker (1856) and that Balanophoraceae (minus Mystropetalon Harv.)…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Phylogenetic relationships of Santalales with insights into the origins of holoparasitic Balanophoraceae

Anderson

et al. 2015

TAXON

161

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To date molecular data have not revealed the exact phylogenetic position of Balanophoraceae in relation to hemiparasitic Santalales. To elucidate the phylogeny of Santalales and the position of Balanophoraceae, three plastid genes (matK, rbcL, accD), three nuclear genes (SSU and LSU rDNA and RPB2) and one mitochondrial gene (matR) from 197 Santalales samples (including 11 Balanophoraceae species) were analyzed with parsimony, maximum likelihood and Bayesian inference methods. Our results demonstrate that Balanophoraceae is composed of two well‐supported clades: a relatively slow‐evolving one including Dactylantus, Hachettea, and Mystropetalon (Mystropetalaceae) and an extremely fast‐evolving one composed of the remaining Balanophoraceae s.str. Support for monophyly of the two clades was low, thus it appears holoparasitism has arisen twice independently in Santalales. These two clades appeared during a time of great change in the order (ca. 100 Ma) when several major evolutionary innovations emerged, e.g., the root hemiparasites of Santalaceae s.l., the first aerial parasites (Misodendraceae), herbaceous root parasites (Schoepfiaceae), root parasitic Loranthaceae (the ancestors of aerial parasitic mistletoes), as well as the holoparasites in Balanophoraceae and Mystropetalaceae.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Phylogenetic relationships of Santalales with insights into the origins of holoparasitic Balanophoraceae

Anderson

et al. 2015

TAXON

161

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Until a century ago the rules on orthography were limited and correction of orthographic errors was widely admitted (Candolle 1867;Briquet, 1906). Orthography, especially Latin orthography, being less and less well known, the Code evolved toward more and more specific prescriptions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The sad story of Agaricus rhacodes/rachodes: Why would an orthographical error with limited current use become accepted through conservation?

Demoulin

2013

TAXON

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The spelling rachodes used by Vittadini in 1833 for a new species of Agaricus has often been considered a correctable orthographical error for rhacodes. Use of the original spelling has however been occasional and was recently promoted by Vellinga and coworkers. The arguments used to support this practice, especially developed by Vellinga and Pennycook, when proposing conservation of rachodes in 2010 are refuted. It is shown that it is philologically illogical to assume an adjective rachodes could have been created, while the existing rhacodes was obviously meant. The use of the two spellings presented by Vellinga and Pennycook is shown to be incomplete. The conclusion is that rachodes should be corrected under Art. 60.1 to rhacodes, the spelling used for every other organism with that epithet, and that this correction is far more universal, including outside Europe, than the usage claimed for justifying a conservation of rachodes. The expenditure of energy caused by the Vellinga and Pennycook proposal shows that new ways to handle orthography of scientific names should be explored.

show abstract

“…According to Hanelt (1997), P. x fruticans is difficult to distinguish from true P. spinosa , and may be an old abandoned fruit crop. Still, some taxonomists doubt the hybrid origin and consider these shrubs to be intermediate or deviating characters as a morphological variety of P. spinosa (Werneck and Bertsch, 1959; Fournier, 1977). A neutral molecular marker analysis (AFLP) did not differentiate P. spinosa from P. x fruticans , while a clear distinction was displayed between this group and P. insititia , suggesting the variety hypothesis (Depypere et al, 2009).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Variance, Genetic Control, and Spatial Phenotypic Plasticity of Morphological and Phenological Traits in Prunus spinosa and Its Large Fruited Forms (P. x fruticans)

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prunus spinosa is a highly esteemed shrub in forest and landscape plantings. Shrubs with larger organs occur often and are considered either as large fruited forms of P. spinosa or as P. x fruticans, involving a hybridization process with the ancient cultivated P. insititia (crop-to-wild gene flow). As climate change may augment hybridization processes in the future, a hybrid origin is important to detect. In addition, studying crop-to-wild gene flow can give insights in putative consequences for the wild populations. We studied the P. spinosa–P. x fruticans group, focusing on morphology and phenology in three experimental plantations. Two plantings harbored cuttings of P. spinosa (clone plantations). A third plantation comprised of a half-sib offspring from a population with both P. spinosa and P. x fruticans (family plantation). Several results point to a hybridization process as the origin of P. x fruticans. The clone plantation revealed endocarp traits to be more genetically controlled than fruit size, while this was the opposite in the family plantation, suggesting the control of fruit size being derived from the putative P. insititia parent. Bud burst, flower opening, and leaf fall were genetically controlled in the clone plantation, whereas in the family plantation intrafamily variability was remarkably large for the bud burst and leaf fall, but not for the flower opening. This suggests there is a reduced genetic control for the first two phenophases, possibly caused by historic hybridization events. Pubescence on the long shoot leaves in the family plantation deviated from the short shoot leaves on the same plants and from long and short shoot leaves in the clone plantation, suggesting again a P. insititia origin. Finally, we quantified spatial phenotypic plasticity, indicating how P. spinosa may react in a changing environment. In contrast to the bud burst and leaf fall, flower opening did not demonstrate plasticity. The fruit size was diminished at the growth site with the shortest growing season while interestingly, the leaf width was enlarged. Leaf size traits appeared more plastic on the long shoots compared to the short shoots, although partitioning of variance did not display a lesser genetic control.

show abstract

Actes du Congrés international de botanique tenu a Paris en août 1867, sous les auspices de la Société botanique de France

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

Phylogenetic relationships of Santalales with insights into the origins of holoparasitic Balanophoraceae

Phylogenetic relationships of Santalales with insights into the origins of holoparasitic Balanophoraceae

The sad story of Agaricus rhacodes/rachodes: Why would an orthographical error with limited current use become accepted through conservation?

Variance, Genetic Control, and Spatial Phenotypic Plasticity of Morphological and Phenological Traits in Prunus spinosa and Its Large Fruited Forms (P. x fruticans)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About