Analysis of Generic Relationships in Anacardiaceae

Abstract

SUMMARYCladistic analyses were undertaken of Anacardiaceae using non-sequence data (30 genera and 81 characters from morphology, anatomy, palynology and chemotaxonomy), sequence data (26 genera -rbcL) and a combined dataset of 16 genera. All analyses supported a group of genera which can be recognised at the subfamily level: Anacardioideae. Sequence data and combined datasets supported the recognition of a second subfamily: Spondiadioideae Kunth emend. Wannan. Both datasets also suggested that Buchanania lies outside both subfamily groups.

Initial development of the endocarp in Lithraea brasiliensis Marchand (Anacardiaceae): with taxonomic notes

“…Rhus possesses 35 species (Pell et al 2011), although endocarp structural details have only been described for only three of these (von Teichman 1989, Wannan andQuinn 1990). Similarly, Schinus possesses 27 species (Barkley 1957) but endocarp descriptions have been reported for only two (Wannan andQuinn 1990, Carmello-Guerreiro andPaoli 2002), while Lithraea possesses four species (Barkley 1962) and endocarp descriptions have been reported for two of these species, L. brasiliensis and L. molleoides (Pienaar andvon Teichman 1998, Carmello-Guerreiro andPaoli 2005). This reveals that although descriptions of pericarp structure and development are considered to possess 'pronounced diagnostic significance,' there is little knowledge available for a large number of Anacardiaceae species (von Teichman 1989).…”

“…Over the last three decades, much attention has been given to the study of the pericarp structure in Anacardiaceae, since the structure -especially that of the endocarp -has great taxonomic and phylogenetic value (von Teichman 1989, Wannan and Quinn 1990, Wannan 2006. Within this context, studies on the origin and development of the mesocarp and endocarp were important for establishing their homologies (von Teichman and Robbertse 1986, von Teichman 1987, von Teichman and van Wyk 1991, Carmello-Guerreiro and Paoli 2002, 2005.…”

“…Within this context, studies on the origin and development of the mesocarp and endocarp were important for establishing their homologies (von Teichman and Robbertse 1986, von Teichman 1987, von Teichman and van Wyk 1991, Carmello-Guerreiro and Paoli 2002, 2005. Considering the taxonomic importance of the anatomical traits of the pericarp, studies on its development help establish intergeneric relationships and also support the subfamilies Spondioideae and Anacardioideae (Wannan 2006). Anacardioideae is defined phylogenetically by the occurrence of a single synapomorphy on the floral structure, even though a number of its genera present an endocarp with a few layers (Wannan 2006).…”

“…Considering the taxonomic importance of the anatomical traits of the pericarp, studies on its development help establish intergeneric relationships and also support the subfamilies Spondioideae and Anacardioideae (Wannan 2006). Anacardioideae is defined phylogenetically by the occurrence of a single synapomorphy on the floral structure, even though a number of its genera present an endocarp with a few layers (Wannan 2006). JOÃO M.S.…”

“…MARIATH Genera such as Rhus, Schinus and Lithraea, among others belonging to the Anacardioideae subfamily, present common pericarp characteristics, such as exocarp sensu lato, parenchymatous mesocarp with secretory cavities or ducts and endocarp sensu stricto with few cell layers, which are usually sclerified (Wannan and Quinn 1990, Wannan 2006, Pell et al 2011. However, there is variability among genera in terms of the number of endocarp layers and occurrence of the crystalliferous layer (Wannan and Quinn 1990, Carmello-Guerreiro and Paoli 2002, 2005, Wannan 2006. Rhus possesses 35 species (Pell et al 2011), although endocarp structural details have only been described for only three of these (von Teichman 1989, Wannan andQuinn 1990).…”