The major clades of Loasaceae: phylogenetic analysis using the plastid matK and trnL‐trnF regions

Abstract

Phylogenetic analyses of Loasaceae that apply DNA sequence data from the plastid trnL-trnF region and matK gene in both maximum-parsimony and maximum-likelihood searches are presented. The results place subfamily Loasoideae as the sister of a subfamily Gronovioideae-Mentzelia clade. Schismocarpus is the sister of the Loasoideae-Gronovioideae-Mentzelia clade. The Schismocarpus-Loasoideae-Gronovioideae-Mentzelia clade is the sister of Eucnide. Several clades in Loasoideae receive strong support, providing insights on generic circumscription problems. Within Mentzelia, several major clades receive strong support, which clarifies relationships among previously circumscribed sections. Prior taxonomic and phylogenetic hypotheses are modeled using topology constraints in parsimony and likelihood analyses; tree lengths and likelihoods, respectively, are compared from constrained and unconstrained analyses to evaluate the relative support for various hypotheses. We use the Shimodaira-Hasegawa (SH) test to establish the significance of the differences between constrained and unconstrained topologies. The SH test rejects topologies based on hypotheses for (1) the placement of gronovioids as the sister of the rest of Loasaceae, (2) the monophyly of subfamily Mentzelioideae as well as Gronovioideae and Loasoideae, (3) the monophyly of Loasa sensu lato as circumscribed by Urban and Gilg, and (4) the monophyly of Mentzelia torreyi and Mentzelia sect. Bartonia.

The seeds of Loasaceae subfam. Loasoideae (Cornales) II: Seed morphology of “South Andean Loasas” (Loasa, Caiophora, Scyphanthus and Blumenbachia)

“…Phylogenetic resolution within this group is, however, still unsatisfactory and an attempt to resolve some of the key questions was made recently (Weigend, 1997). The concepts proposed there have been heavily criticized by Hufford et al (2003), but are in agreement with published data, as far as taxon sampling carries. Irrespective of that controversy, some groupings are now clear (Weigend et al, 2004a) and the current understanding of the relationships is summarized in Fig.…”

Hacia una fitogeografía histórica del Desierto de Atacama

“…(Plumbaginaceae) (Lledó et al, 2005). (Steinmann & Porter, 2002), Huidobria Gay (Loasaceae) (Hufford et al, 2003;Weigend et al, 2004), Phrodus Miers (Solanaceae) (Levin & Miller, 2005), Sisymbrium L. s.l. y Sibara O.E.Schulz (Warwick et al, 2002(Warwick et al, , 2009Al Shehbaz, 2010;Couvreur et al, 2010).…”

Insular Woodiness on the Canary Islands: A Remarkable Case of Convergent Evolution

“…993 ular phylogenetic results for many woody island genera: to name just a few, Aeonium and Echium on the Canary Islands (Bö hle et al 1996;Mes and 't Hart 1996); Viola and the silverswords Argyroxiphium, Dubautia, and Wilkesia on the Hawaiian islands (Baldwin et al 1991;Ballard and Sytsma 2000); Eryngium and Senecio (formerly Robinsonia) on the Juan Fernandez Islands (Calviñ o et al 2010;Pelser et al 2010b); Dendrosicyos on Socotra (Schaefer et al 2009); Nesohedyotis on St. Helena (Lens et al 2009); and Fitchia and Plakothira on Polynesian islands (Hufford et al 2003;Crawford et al 2009). Darwin's insular-woodiness hypothesis is further supported by (1) the excellent dispersal mechanisms of many herbaceous plant groups that have reached isolated islands, (2) the relatively young age (∼5 Myr or less) of several insular woody groups, based on molecular divergence estimates (Baldwin and Sanderson 1998;Carine 2005;Fiz et al 2008;Kim et al 2008;Feodorova et al 2010), and (3) the presence of specific wood features in these secondarily woody species ("paedomorphosis" sensu Carlquist 1962; "protracted juvenilism" sensu Carlquist 2009Carlquist , 2012; molecular phylogenies have confirmed the evidence for an herbaceous ancestry adduced well before the molecular era (Carlquist 1962(Carlquist , 1969a(Carlquist , 1969b(Carlquist , 1970a(Carlquist , 1970b(Carlquist , 1970c(Carlquist , 1974(Carlquist , 1985Carlquist and Eckhart 1982;Cumbie 1983; however, see "Discussion" about interpreting this wood anatomical syndrome).…”