Biogeographical and molecular observations on Phaseolus glabellus (Fabaceae, Phaseolinae) and its taxonomic status

Abstract

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org. . International Association for Plant Taxonomy (IAPT) is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Taxon. molecular observations on Phaseolus glabellus (Fabaceae, Phaseolinae) and its taxonomic status. -Taxon 45: 493-501. 1996. -ISSN 0040-0262.The wild, red-flowered Phaseolus glabellus is generally considered either as a species of the P. coccineus complex or as a subspecies of P. coccineus. Biogeographic considerations as well as experimental hybridization, seed storage protein electrophoresis and cpDNA polymorphism point at its isolated taxonomic position and distinctness from P. coccineus. The position of P. glabellus in Phaseolus and its relationships with the remaining taxa of the P. coccineus complex are discussed.

Taxonomy of Tepary Bean and Wild Relatives as Determined by Amplified Fragment Length Polymorphism (AFLP) Markers

“…In this regard, P. glabelus was once more confirmed as phylogenetically distant from P. coccineus with which it is often associated (Delgado, 1985). These results are similar to those of Schmit et al (1996) with seed storage proteins; Schmit et al (1993) and Llaca et al (1994) with cpDNA polymorphisms; and Jacob et al (1995) with rDNA‐RFLPs. Our work also shows the rugosi section with P. angustissimus , P. carteri and P. filiformis , as a natural entity, linked to the sections Acutifolii and Phaseoli Phaseolus filiformis and P. angustissimus were also related, confirming results on chloroplast and internally transcribed ribosomal DNA (Fofana et al, 1999; Delgado et al (1999), respectively).…”

Relationships of Lupinus species based on variation in seed protein electrophoretic profiles

“…These proteins are particularly abundant in the seeds of legumes and have provided valid source of evidence that have successfully been used for addressing the systematic relationships at the species level in many genera of the family Fabaceae. For example, to differentiate between species in Trifolium (Badr, 1995), Phaseolus (Schmit et al, 1996), Sesbania (Badr et al, 1998), Lathyrus (El-Shanshoury, 1997;Badr et al, 2000) and Astragalus (Al-Nowaihi et al, 2002) and also in plants from other families such as Solanaceae (Khalifa, et al 1998), Mentha from family Lammiaceae (Badr et al, 2003) and Artemisia from family Asteraceae (Mohamed, 2004). The present work deals with the application of seed protein diversity as revealed by SDS-PAGE to reassess the taxonomic relationships of 27 samples representing 14 species, including eight (17 samples) from the Old World lupines and six (ten samples) from the New World lupines in the light of their pervious taxonomic treatments.…”

Studies in the Maloideae (Rosaceae) 1- Chaenomeles Lindley and Cydonia Miller

“…On the other hand, seed proteins are highly stable, being unaffected by environmental conditions Haborne & Turner (1984). Thus electrophoretic patterns of total seed protein (protein profiles) as revealed by polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis in the presence of sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS-PAGE) have provided a valid source of taxonomic evidence and were used to address taxonomic relationships at the generic and specific levels, for example Vigna (Paino et al, 1993), Phaseolus (Schmit et al, 1996) Sesbania (Badr et al, 1998) & Nigella (Jensen 1984).…”