2015
DOI: 10.3732/ajb.1500021
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Caladenia revisited: Results of molecular phylogenetic analyses of Caladeniinae plastid and nuclear loci

Abstract: Based on our results, none of the current systems of classification of the subtribe is satisfactory. Instead our results point to Lindley's 1840 interpretation of Caladenia, but including Glossodia and Elythranthera, as being the most accurate reflection of the group. Accordingly, a renewed reclassification of Caladeniinae is proposed as well as several new combinations.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
12
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 54 publications
0
12
0
Order By: Relevance
“…While broadly recovering similar groupings of species and genera at the subtribe levels to Weston et al (2014) (c.f. Figures 2 and 6), our results indicate better resolution, particularly among closely related genera (e.g., among genera within the Drakaeinae, Megastylidinae, and Caladeniinae, see Clements et al, 2015; Miller & Clements, 2014; Weston et al, 2014)). However, our inability to resolve the relationships between the three major clades comprising the Prasophyllinae as Clade 1, Clade 2 as (Diuridinae(Cryptostylidinae(Thelymitrinae(Megastylidinae(Drakaeinae))))) and Clade 3 as (Acianthinae(Caladeniinae)), mirrors earlier findings (Clements et al, 2002; Kores et al, 2001; Weston et al, 2014, Figure 2), despite the very substantial increase in the number of loci.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 51%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…While broadly recovering similar groupings of species and genera at the subtribe levels to Weston et al (2014) (c.f. Figures 2 and 6), our results indicate better resolution, particularly among closely related genera (e.g., among genera within the Drakaeinae, Megastylidinae, and Caladeniinae, see Clements et al, 2015; Miller & Clements, 2014; Weston et al, 2014)). However, our inability to resolve the relationships between the three major clades comprising the Prasophyllinae as Clade 1, Clade 2 as (Diuridinae(Cryptostylidinae(Thelymitrinae(Megastylidinae(Drakaeinae))))) and Clade 3 as (Acianthinae(Caladeniinae)), mirrors earlier findings (Clements et al, 2002; Kores et al, 2001; Weston et al, 2014, Figure 2), despite the very substantial increase in the number of loci.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 51%
“…One basis for sample inclusion in C72 was the requirement that two or more samples per species were successfully sequenced. Given a lack of species‐level resolution in previous molecular studies (Clements et al, 2015; Swarts et al, 2014), we reasoned that a first test of the effectiveness of Set 5 would be if the phylogenetic analysis could group individuals of the same species together. We also included examples of species that, based on morphology, appear to be closely allied as members of “species complexes” but can still be confidently distinguished in the field (Brown et al, 2013).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, we predict that this relationship is likely to be correlational rather than causal. While the sister clades to subgenera Calonema and Phlebochilus are pollinated primarily by food deception of nectar foraging insects (Phillips et al ., ; see Clements, Howard & Miller, , for phylogenetic data), these subgenera contain a large number of species pollinated by sexual deception of thynnine wasps (Phillips et al ., ), a strategy that appears to be associated with relatively rapid speciation (Cozzolino & Widmer, ; Peakall et al ., ). Further, sampling of genera allied to Caladenia may serve to erode this trend of low specificity in species‐poor clades.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Drakaea and Caladenia belong to different subtribes of the Diurideae (Drakaeinae and Caladeniinae; Kores et al 2001). No detailed phylogeny is available for Caladenia below the level of subgenus (see Clements et al 2015), but based on morphology, our study species Caladenia decora, C. procera and C. pectinata are believed to be closely related and may well be sister species (Hopper and Brown 2001; Fig. 1).…”
Section: Study Speciesmentioning
confidence: 97%