Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T08:55:05.988Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

HESPEROCODON, A NEW GENERIC NAME FOR WAHLENBERGIA HEDERACEA (CAMPANULACEAE): PHYLOGENY AND CAPSULE DEHISCENCE

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 February 2014

W. M. M. Eddie  and
C. N. Cupido
W. M. M. Eddie
Affiliation:
Office of Lifelong Learning, Paterson’s Land, University of Edinburgh, Holyrood Road, Edinburgh EH8 8AQ, Scotland, UK. E-mail: [email protected]
C. N. Cupido
Affiliation:
South African National Biodiversity Institute, Compton Herbarium, Private Bag X7, Claremont 7735, and Department of Biodiversity and Conservation Biology, University of the Western Cape, Private Bag X17, Bellville 7535, South Africa. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

The European species Wahlenbergia hederacea (L.) Rchb. (Campanulaceae) is molecularly distant from the remainder of the wahlenbergioids, and its inclusion with them renders the tribe Wahlenbergieae Endl. (1838) non-monophyletic. Additional support for this conclusion may be derived from its gross morphological characteristics, which are essentially campanuloid. However, although not strictly identical to that of Wahlenbergia Schrad. ex Roth, the capsule dehiscence mechanism of W. hederacea is still fundamentally wahlenbergioid and differs from the majority of campanuloids. Several genera such as Feeria and Jasione, which are intermediate between typical wahlenbergioids and typical campanuloids, have similar capsule characteristics, and it is postulated that Wahlenbergia hederacea, together with these ‘transitional’ genera, are all relatively ancient components of a campanulaceous palaeoflora of the early Tertiary of Eurasia. The wahlenbergioid type of dehiscence is considered to be a plesiomorphic character whereas the diverse campanuloid types of dehiscence mechanisms are derived under conditions of intense selection. It is suggested that Wahlenbergia hederacea is probably most closely related to, and ancestral to, the rapunculoid lineages of Campanula s.l. that subsequently evolved over much of Eurasia and North America. Consequently, Wahlenbergia hederacea should be classified in the Campanuloideae and the new generic name Hesperocodon Eddie & Cupido gen. nov. is proposed.

Keywords

Campanulaceaecampanuloidcapsule morphologydehiscence mechanismsloculicidalLusitanianphylogenyporicidalvalvatewahlenbergioid
Type
Articles
Information
Edinburgh Journal of Botany , Volume 71 , Issue 1 , March 2014 , pp. 63 - 74
Copyright
Copyright © Trustees of the Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bauhin, C. (1596). Phyopinax. 141. Basiliae.Google Scholar
Bentham, G. (1876). Campanulaceae. In: Bentham, G. & Hooker, J. D. (eds) Genera Plantarum 2: 541–564. London: Reeve & Co.Google Scholar
Brehmer, W. von (1915). Über die systematische Gliederung unt Entwicklung der Gattung Wahlenbergia in Afrika. Bot. Jahrb. 53: 9–143.Google Scholar
Burnett, G. T. (1835). Outlines of Botany. London: Henry Renshaw: 942, 1094, 1110.Google Scholar
Buser, R. (1894). Contributions à la connaissance des Campanulacées. 1. Genus Trachelium revisum. Bull. Herb. Boissier 2: 501–532 + pl. XV–XIX, illus.Google Scholar
Candolle, A. de (1830). Monographie des Campanulees. Paris: Veuve Desroy.Google Scholar
Clapham, A. R., Tutin, T. G. & Warburg, E. F. (1962). Flora of the British Isles, 2nd edition. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cosner, M. E., Raubeson, L. A. & Jansen, R. K. (2004). Chloroplast DNA rearrangements in Campanulaceae: phylogenetic utility of highly rearranged genomes. BMC Evol. Biol. 4: 1–27.Google Scholar
Cupido, C. N. (2009). Systematic studies of the South African Campanulaceae sensu stricto with an emphasis on generic delimitations. PhD thesis, University of Cape Town.Google Scholar
Dumortier, B. (1822). Roucela. In: Commentationes botanicae. Tournay: Ch. Casterman-Dien: 14–15.Google Scholar
Eddie, W. M. M. (1984). A preliminary study of the pollen of the Campanulaceae. Unpublished study for MSc programme in Pure and Applied Plant Taxonomy, University of Reading.Google Scholar
Eddie, W. M. M. (1997). A global reassessment of the generic relationships in the bellflower family (Campanulaceae). PhD thesis, University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Eddie, W. M. M., Shulkina, T., Gaskin, J., Haberle, R. C. & Jansen, R. K. (2003). Phylogeny of Campanulaceae s.str. inferred from ITS sequences of nuclear ribosomal DNA. Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard. 90: 554–575.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eddie, W. M. M., Cupido, C. N. & Skvarla, J. J. (2010). Pollen and reproductive morphology of Rhigiophyllum and Siphocodon (Campanulaceae): two unique genera of the fynbos vegetation of South Africa. Bothalia 40(1): 103–115.Google Scholar
Endlicher, S. (1838). Genera Plantarum (secundum ordines naturales disposita), pl. 514. Vindob.Google Scholar
Fedorov, A. A. [1957] (1972). Campanulaceae. In: Shiskin, B. K. & Bobrov, E. G. (eds) Flora URSS 24: 126–453, 459–475. Moscow and Leningrad: Nauka. English translation: Israel Programme for Scientific Translations, Jerusalem.Google Scholar
Feer, H. (1890). Beiträge zur Systematik und Morphologie der Campanulaceen. Bot. Jahrb. Syst. 12: 608–621.Google Scholar
Fourreau, J. P. (1869). Catalogue des plantes qui croissent spontanement le long du cours de Rhône. Ann. Soc. Linn. Lyon (n.s.) 17: 112.Google Scholar
Gadella, T. W. J. (1966). Some notes on the delimitation of genera in the Campanulaceae. I, II. Proc. Roy. Netherl. Acad. Science, series C, 69(4): 502–508, 509–521.Google Scholar
Haberle, R. C., Dang, A., Lee, T., Peñaflor, C., Cortes-Burns, H., Oestreich, A.et al. (2009). Taxonomic and biogeographic implications of a phylogenetic analysis of the Campanulaceae based on three chloroplast genes. Taxon 58: 1–20.Google Scholar
Hartvig, P. (1991). Campanula (pp. 369–387); Edraianthus (Halacsyella) (pp. 394–396). In: Strid, A. & Tan, K. (eds) Mountain Flora of Greece. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Hilliard, O. M. & Burtt, B. L. (1973). Notes on some plants of southern Africa chiefly from Natal: III. Campanulaceae. Notes Roy. Bot. Gard. Edinburgh 32: 314–327.Google Scholar
Hong, D. Y. (1980). Homocodon Hong – a new genus of Campanulaceae from China. Acta Phytotax. Sin. 18: 473–475.Google Scholar
Hong, D. Y. & Ma, L. M. (1991). A new species of the genus Homocodon (Campanulaceae) from Sichuan, China. Acta Phytotax. Sin. 29: 268–269.Google Scholar
Ingrouille, M. (1995). Historical Ecology of the British Flora. London: Chapman & Hall.Google Scholar
Kay, Q. O. M. & John, R. F. (1995). The conservation of scarce and declining plant species in lowland Wales: population genetics, demographic ecology and recommendations for future conservation in 32 species of grassland and related habitats. Countryside Council for Wales Science Report No. 110.Google Scholar
Kolakovsky, A. A. (1986). Carpology of Campanulaceae and problems of taxonomy. Bot. Zhurn. (Moscow & Leningrad) 71: 1155–1168 [in Russian].Google Scholar
Kolakovsky, A. A. (1987). System of the Campanulaceae family from the Old World. Bot. Zhurn. (Moscow & Leningrad) 72: 1572–1579.Google Scholar
Kovanda, M. (1978). Campanulaceae. In: Heywood, V. H. (ed.) Flowering Plants of the World, pp. 254–256. New York: Mayflower Books.Google Scholar
Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lakušić, R. (1988). Protoedraianthus Lakušić status nova. In: Sliskovic, T., Sijaric, R., Silic, C. & Obratil, S. (eds) Minerali, stijene, izumrli i živi svijet Bosne i Hercegovine. Proceedings of the Zemaljski Muzej Bosne i Hercegovine, pp. 263–272. Sarajevo.Google Scholar
Lammers, T. G. (2007). World Checklist and Bibliography of Campanulaceae. London: Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew.Google Scholar
Leins, P. & Erbar, C. (2010). Flower and Fruit: Morphology, Ontogeny, Phylogeny, Function and Ecology. Stuttgart: Schweizerbart Science Publishers.Google Scholar
Linnaeus, C. (1753). Species Plantarum, p. 169. Facsimile of the 1st edition, 1957. W. T. Stearn, introd. London: Ray Society.Google Scholar
Lu, Z., Ding, K. Y., Xu, L. & Wang, Y. H. (2007). A cytological study on Homocodon brevipes (Campanulaceae), a species endemic to China. Acta Bot. Yunnan. 29: 323–326.Google Scholar
Morin, N. (1983). Systematics of Githopsis (Campanulaceae). Syst. Bot. 8(4): 436–468.Google Scholar
Olesen, J. M., Alarcón, M., Ehlers, B. K., Aldasoro, J. J. & Roquet, C. (2012). Pollination, biogeography and phylogeny of oceanic island bellflowers (Campanulaceae). Perspect. Pl. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 4: 169–182.Google Scholar
Prebble, J. M., Cupido, C. N., Meudt, H. M. & Garnock-Jones, P. J. (2011). First phylogenetic and biogeographical study of the southern bluebells (Wahlenbergia, Campanulaceae). Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 59: 638–648.Google Scholar
Preston, C. D., Pearman, D. A. & Dines, T. D. (2002). New Atlas of the British and Irish Flora. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Reichenbach, H. G. L. (1827). Iconographia botanica seu plantae criticae 5: 47.Google Scholar
Rix, M. (2004). Wahlenbergia hederacea. In: Curtis’s Bot. Mag. 21: 61–64 + pl. 488, illus.Google Scholar
Roquet, C., Sanmartin, I., Garcia-Jacas, N., Sáez, L., Susanna, A., Wikström, N. & Aldasoro, J. J. (2009). Reconstructing the history of Campanulaceae with a Bayesian approach to molecular dating and dispersal–vicariance analyses. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 52: 575–587.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Roth, A. W. (1827). Enumeratio Plantarum Phaenogamarum in Germania sponte nascentium 1: 690.Google Scholar
Schönland, S. (1889). Campanulaceae. In: Engler, A. & Prantl, K. (eds) Die natürlichen Pflanzenfamilien, IV, 5: 40–70. Leipzig: W. Engelmann.Google Scholar
Schousboe, P. K. A. (1800). Iagttag. Vextrig. Marokko: 85.Google Scholar
Shulkina, T. V., Gaskin, J. F. & Eddie, W. M. M. (2003). Morphological studies toward an improved classification of Campanulaceae s.str. Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard. 90: 576–591.Google Scholar
Stefanović, S., Lakušić, D., Kuzmina, M., Mededović, S., Tan, K. & Stevanović, V. (2008). Molecular phylogeny of Edraianthus (Grassy Bells; Campanulaceae) based on non-coding plastid DNA sequences. Taxon 57(2): 452–475.Google Scholar
Takhtajan, A. L. (1987). Systema Magnoliophytorum. Leningrad: Nauka.Google Scholar
Thulin, M. (1975). The genus Wahlenbergia s.lat. (Campanulaceae) in tropical Africa and Madagascar. Symb. Bot. Upsal. 21: 1–223, illus., maps.Google Scholar
Tournefort, J. P. de(1700). Institutiones rei herbariae. Paris.Google Scholar
Webb, P. B. & Berthelot, S. (1844). Naturelle des Iles Canaries 2(3): 6.Google Scholar
Zhou, Z., Wen, J., Li, G. & Sun, H. (2012). Phylogenetic assessment and biogeographic analyses of tribe Peracarpeae (Campanulaceae). Pl. Syst. Evol. 298: 323–336.Google Scholar