Diversity of inflorescences in the Boutelouinae subtribe (Poaceae: Chloridoideae: Cynodonteae)

Synflorescence morphology of grasses with reduced terminal inflorescences: a case study of Jouvea (Cynodonteae, Chloridoideae, Poaceae)

“…When present, these axes do not form intricate branching systems and it is easy to differentiate the terminal inflorescence (Muchut et al in press). These trophotagma enrichment axes are recorded in Bambusoideae, a few Chloridoideae genera such as Blepharidachne Hackel (1887: 68), Munroa Torrey (1857: 158), Schaffnerella Nash (1912: 141), some species of Bouteloua Lagasca (1805: 134) and Sporobolus Brown (1810: 169) (Watson & Dallwitz 1992, Kellogg 2015, Pilatti 2016, and genera of the subfamily Panicoideae such as Dichanthelium Gould (1974: 59), Dimorphochloa Blake (1941: 1), Xerochloa Brown (1810: 196), Zygochloa Blake (1941: 7), and some species of Stenotaphrum Trinius (1822: 175) and Streptostachys Desvaux (1810: 190) (Watson & Dallwitz 1992, Vegetti 1999, Pilatti et al 2014, Pilatti 2016. In many grasses, the promotion or repression of lateral meristems located in the long internode zones seems to be mainly affected by environmental factors (Rua & Weberling 1998, Perreta et al 2009.…”

Inflorescence diversity in subtribe Eleusininae (Poaceae: Chloridoideae: Cynodonteae)

“…A full list of the studied specimens is presented in Appendix A in Supplementary data. The inflorescence of Eleusininae was characterized using six morphological characters that were chosen based on personal observation and previous studies (Rua, 2003;Kern et al, 2008;Reinheimer and Vegetti, 2008;Reinheimer et al, 2013;Pilatti and Vegetti, 2014;Pilatti, 2016): (1) general appearance of inflorescence (pyramidal/digitate/single-branched), (2) number of primary branches, (3) presence/absence of terminal spikelet at the end of the main axis (non truncated/truncated inflorescence), (4) morphological similarity of the primary branches of the inflorescence (partially homogenized/fully homogenized; Rua and Weberling, 1998), ( 5) maximum degree of ramification (second order/third order), and (6) number of florets (fertile and sterile) per spikelet.…”

Comparative study of the inflorescence, spikelet and flower development in species of Cynodonteae (Chloridoideae, Poaceae)

“…Stür, 1986;Frank, 1998;Le Roux & Kellogg, 1999;Orr et al, 2002;Doust & Kellogg, 2002;Kellogg, Hiser & Doust, 2004;Bess, Doust & Kellogg, 2005;Reinheimer, Pozner & Vegetti, 2005a;Liu et al, 2007;Sajo, Lonhi-Wagner & Rudall, 2007;Kinney, Columbus & Friar, 2008;Reinheimer et al, 2009Reinheimer et al, , 2010 Figure 1. A-E, Simplified diagrams of the different inflorescence types found in the studied group as described in Pilatti & Vegetti (2014), Pilatti (2016) and Pilatti et al (2017). A, Panicle of spikelets with terminal spikelet (at arrowhead) and nonhomogenized first-order branches.…”

“…The inflorescences of this lineage may be panicles (composed of a main axis bearing ramified lateral branches) or racemes (in which the main axis develops non-ramified first-order branches) of spikelets. Recent studies using a comparative approach classified the inflorescences of the clade into five groups based of the branching patterns and the presence/ absent of terminal spikelet (Pilatti & Vegetti, 2014;Pilatti, 2016;Pilatti et al, 2017): panicle of spikelets with a terminal spikelet and non-homogenized firstorder branches (unevenly branched, Rúa & Weberling, 1998) (Fig. 1A); panicle of spikelets with a terminal spikelet and homogenized first-order branches (evenly branched, Rúa & Weberling, 1998) (Fig.…”