The status ofStruckiaMüll.Hal. (Plagiotheciaceae, Bryopsida) inferred from multiple nuclear and chloroplast loci

Abstract

The Asian genus Struckia Mü ll.Hal. is reduced to a synonym of Plagiothecium Bruch & Schimp. according to a phylogenetic analysis involving S. argentata (Mitt.) Mü ll.Hal., S. enervis (Broth.) Ignatov, T.J.Kop. & D.G.Long and 13 representative boreal species of Plagiothecium. Two nuclear regions, ITS and partial gapC, and five chloroplast regions, rbcL, rps4-trnS, psaB, trnG and trnL-F, were utilized to reconstruct the phylogenetic relationship between Struckia and Plagiothecium. Bayesian, maximum parsimony, and maximum likelihood analyses resulted in a strongly supported clade including Struckia and Plagiothecium. Plagiothecium handelii Broth. and P. paleaceum (Mitt.) A.Jaeger, which share similar geographical ranges with Struckia and intermediate morphological traits between Struckia and Plagiothecium, grouped with the Chinese Struckia, and all of them appeared as sister to the 'core' of Plagiothecium. The accurate position of P. piliferum (Sw.) Schimp. remains unclear due to moderate support from all analyses, and we suggest that it is retained in Plagiothecium until further evidence is available.

Phylogenetic position and delimitation of the moss family Plagiotheciaceae in the order Hypnales

“…The relationships we have identified in Plagiotheciaceae are congruent with earlier studies by Pedersen & Hedenäs (), Ignatov & Kuznetsova () and Zuo et al . (). Based on phylogenetic inferences using ITS and trnL ‐ F sequence data and morphological similarity, Myurella acuminata Lindb.…”

“…If this species is retained in Plagiothecium , Struckia must be merged with its sister genus Plagiothecium , as suggested by Zuo et al . (). However, both clades representing these genera are highly supported, and a synonymization hides the distinct geographical distribution of Struckia in the widely distributed Plagiothecium and morphological differences between the genera (see Zuo et al ., ).…”

“…; see also Cox et al ., ). Unlike earlier phylogenetic studies of Plagiotheciaceae (Hedenäs & Pedersen, ; Ignatov & Kuznetsova, ; Zuo et al ., ) or Hypnales (Tsubota et al ., ; Ignatov et al ., ; Cox et al ., ; Merget & Wolf, ; Huttunen et al ., ), the present article clarifies both the delimitation of the family and its position in Hypnales with strong support from molecular analyses, which might be attributed to insufficient sampling or to insufficient phylogenetic signal in the markers used in the earlier studies.…”

“…They were placed in the family on the basis of morphology and weak support from molecular analysis (Pedersen & Hedenäs, ). As a result of the position of these genera, however, Plagiotheciaceae was later resolved as polyphyletic in molecular analyses (Cox et al ., ), but the topology of Pedersen & Hedenäs () was important in confirming the delimitation of Hypnaceae and Plagiotheciaceae, which was a constant problem in older classifications (for a review, see Hedenäs, ; Zuo et al ., ). Still, some disagreement remained regarding the circumscription of the two families and the delimitation of Plagiotheciaceae, and some authors continued to use the narrow circumscription of Buck & Ireland () who placed only Plagiothecium Bruch & Schimp.…”

Phylogenetic position of the genusBryhniaKaurin (Brachytheciaceae, Bryophyta) inferred from chloroplast (rpl16,trnG,trnL–F) and nuclear (ITS) sequence data

“…Based on phylogenetic tree-based approaches, many studies have successfully settled the systematic positions of controversial taxa in bryophytes (e.g. Stech & Frahm, 1999;Stech et al, 2003;Blockeel et al, 2005;Wynns et al, 2009;Zuo et al, 2011). The purpose of the present study is to provide a detailed phylogenetic analysis of the systematic status of the genus Bryhnia, based on the nuclear marker ITS1-5.8S-ITS2 and the plastid markers rpl16, trnG, and trnL-F, and using an extended set of samples.…”