Skip to main content
Log in

Historical development of the present classification of morphological types of stomates

  • Published:
The Botanical Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

There is a long-standing confusion between morphologic and ontogenetic classifications of stomates. The earliest scheme, by Vesque (1889) was proposed as basically ontogenetic, but it was soon widely applied to mature leaves. The ontogenetic distinction between haplocheilic and syndetocheilic stomates in gymnosperms, proposed by Florin (1931, 1933) soon suffered a similar fate. Continuing studies over the past half-century have shown that stomatal ontogeny is only poorly correlated with the mature morphology. Efforts to combine ontogenetic and morphologic features in a single scheme have led to classifications so complex as to be impractical. The explicitly morphological classification by Metcalfe and Chalk (1950) is the foundation for the most widely used present scheme, in which some 14 morphological types are recognized. The distinctions among these types are conceptually useful, though often arbitrary in practice.

Резюме

На протяжении многих лет существует проти воречие между морфологическ ой и онтогенетической к лассификациями усть иц. Наиболее ранняя классификаци я Vesque (1889), в основе своей онтогенетическая, скоро стала широко ис пользоваться для зре лых листьев. То же самое случилось с классифи кацией устьиц голосе менных, предложенной Florin (1931, 1933). Многочисленные исс ледования за последн ие 50 лет показали, что между развитием у стьиц и их зрелой морф ологией имеет место лишь незначите льная корреляция. Уси лия соединить онтогенет ические и морфологические пр изнаки в одной класси фикации привели к классификации стол ь сложной, что ее трудн о использовать на практике. Исключител ьно морфологическая классификация Metcaife and Chalk (1950) является основани ем для наиболее широк о используемой современной классиф икации, которая включ ает 14 морфологических типов. Различия между этими типами концепт уально полезны, хотя иногда н а практике они бывают неясны.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Literature Cited

  • Baas, P. 1972. Anatomical contributions to plant taxonomy. II. The affinitiesof Hua Pierre andAfrostyrax Perkins et Gilg. Blumea20: 161–192.

    Google Scholar 

  • — 1974. Stomatal types in Icacinaceae. Additional observations on genera outside Malesia. Acta Bot. Neerl.23: 193–200.

    Google Scholar 

  • — 1975. Vegetative anatomy and the affinities of Aquifoliaceae,Sphenostemon, Phelline andOncotheca. Blumea22: 311–407.

    Google Scholar 

  • — &R. Kool. 1983. Comparative leaf anatomy ofHeisteria (Olacaceae). Blumea28: 367–388.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bailey, I. W. &C. G. Nast. 1945. Morphology and relationships ofTrochodendron andTetracentron. I. Stem, root, and leaf. J. Arnold Arbor.26: 143–154.

    Google Scholar 

  • ——. 1948. Morphology and relationships ofIllicium, Schisandra, andKadsura. I. Stem and leaf. J. Arnold Arbor.29: 77–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baranova, M. A. 1972. Systematic anatomy of the leaf epidermis in the Magnoliaceae and some related families. Taxon21: 447–469.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — 1975a. Klassifikatsiya ontogeneticheskikh tipov ustits (k vykhodu b svet publikatsii Frins-Klassensa i Van Kottema). Bot. Zhurn. SSSR60: 280–297.

    Google Scholar 

  • — 1975b. Stomatograficheskoe issledovanie cem. Flagellariaceae. Bot. Zhurn.60: 1690–1697.

    Google Scholar 

  • — 1983. On the laterocytic stomatotype in angiosperms. Brittonia35: 93–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — 1985. Klassifikatsii morfologicheskikh tipov ustits. Bot. Zhurn. SSSR70: 1585–1595.

    Google Scholar 

  • — 1986. Sravitelno-stomatograficheskoe issledovanie cemeistva Chloranthaceae. Pages 12–19in Problemy paleobotaniki. Soviet Sciences Press (Nauka), Leningrad.

    Google Scholar 

  • — 1987. O stefanotsitnom tipe ustichnogo apparata u tsvetkovykh. Bot. Zhurn. SSSR72: 59–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bondeson, W. 1952. Entwicklungsgeschichte und Bau der Spaltöffnungen bei den GattungenTrochodendron Sieb, et Zucc.,Tetracentron Oliv. undDrimys J.R. et G. Forst. Acta Horti Berg.16: 169–217.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brett, D. W. 1979. Ontogeny and classification of the stomatal complex ofPlatanus. Ann. Bot. (London)44: 249–251.

    Google Scholar 

  • Den Hartog, R. M. &P. Baas. 1978. Epidermal characters of the Celastraceae sensu lato. Acta Bot. Neer.27: 355–388.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dilcher, D. L. 1974. Approaches to the identification of angiosperm leaf remains. Bot. Rev.40: 1–157.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farooqui, P. 1981. Ontogeny of the anomocytic stoma—Variations and modifications. Proc. Indian Acad. Sci. (Plant Sci.)90: 245–252.

    Google Scholar 

  • Florin, R. 1931. Untersuchungen zur Stammesgeschichte der Coniferales und Cordaitales. Kongl. Svenska Vetenskapsakad. Handl. Ser. 3,10(1): 1–588.

    Google Scholar 

  • — 1933. Studien über die Cycadales des Mesozoikums… Erörterungen über die Spaltöffnungsapparate der Bennettitales. Kongl. Svenska Vetenskapsakad. Handl. Ser. 3,12(5): 1–134.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fryns-Claessens, E. &W. Van Cotthem. 1973. A new classification of the ontogenetic types of stomata. Bot. Rev.39: 71–138.

    Google Scholar 

  • Golysheva, M. D. 1974. O paratsitnom ustichnom tipe v listyakh pokrytosemennykh. Bjull. Moskovsk. Obshch. Isp. Prir., Otd. Biol.79(4): 94–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hildebrand, F. 1866. Ueber die Entwickelung der Farnkrautspaltöffhungen. Bot. Zeitung (Berlin)24: 245–251.

    Google Scholar 

  • Inamdar, J. A. 1969. Epidermal structure and stomatal ontogeny in some Polygonales and Centrospermae. Ann. Bot. (London), II,33: 541–552.

    Google Scholar 

  • — 1970. Epidermal structure and development of stomata in some Polygonaceae. Proc. Indian Acad. Sci.72B: 91–98.

    Google Scholar 

  • —,J. S. S. Mohan &R. B. Subramanian. 1986. Stomatal classifications—A review. Feddes Repert.97: 147–160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jalan, S. 1962. The ontogeny of the stomata inSchisandra grandiflora Hook.f. & Thorns. Phytomorphology12: 239–242.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jansen, W. T. &P. Baas. 1973. Comparative leaf anatomy ofKokoona andLophopetalum (Celastraceae). Blumea21: 153–178.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maroti, I. 1961. Untersuchung der Entwicklung der Epidermis des Psilotineae- und des Filicineae-Blattes und der Entwicklung des Stomas. Acta Biol. (Szeged.)7: 43–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Metcalfe, C. R. 1961. The anatomical approach to systematics. General introduction with special reference to recent work on monocotyledons. Pages 146–150in Recent advances in botany. University of Toronto Press, Toronto.

    Google Scholar 

  • — &L. Chalk. 1950. Anatomy of the dicotyledons. 2 vols. Oxford Univ. Press, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mickel, J. T. 1962. A monographic study of the genusAneimia, subgenusCoptophyllum. Iowa State Coll. J. Sci.36: 349–482.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oudemans, M. 1866. Sur l’origine des stomates de quelques especes d’Aneimia. Bull. Congr. Int. Bot. Hort. Amsterdam. Pages 85–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paliwal, G. S. 1961. The development of stomata inLinum usitatissimum L. Curr. Sci.30: 269–271.

    Google Scholar 

  • — 1966. Structure and ontogeny of stomata in some Caryophyllaceae. Phytomorphology16: 533–539.

    Google Scholar 

  • — 1967. Ontogeny of stomata in some Cruciferae. Canad. J. Bot.45: 495–500.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pant, D. D. 1965. On the ontogeny of stomata and other homologous structures. Plant Sci. Series, Allahabad.1: 1–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • — &R. Banerji. 1965. Structure and ontogeny of stomata in some Piperaceae. J. Linn. Soc, Bot.59: 223–228.

    Google Scholar 

  • — &P. Kidwai. 1964. On the diversity in the development and organization of stomata inPhyla nodiflora Michx. Curr. Sci.33: 653–654.

    Google Scholar 

  • — &B. Mehra. 1963. Development of caryophyllaceous stomata inAsteracantha longifolia Nees. Ann. Bot. (London), II,27: 647–652.

    Google Scholar 

  • ——. 1963. Development of stomata in some Ranunculaceae. Flora155: 179–188.

    Google Scholar 

  • — &B. K. Verma. 1963. Development of stomata in leaves ofNotonia grandiflora DC. J. Indian Bot. Soc.42: 384–391.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patel, J. D. 1978. How should we interpret and distinguish subsidiary cells? Bot. J. Linn. Soc.77: 65–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • — 1979. A new morphological classification of stomatal complexes. Phytomorphology29: 218–229.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patel, R. C. &J. A. Inamdar. 1971. Structure and ontogeny of stomata in some Polemoniales. Ann. Bot. (London), II,35: 389–409.

    Google Scholar 

  • Payne, W. W. 1970. Helicocytic and allelocytic stomata: Unrecognized patterns in the Dicotyledonae. Amer. J. Bot.57: 140–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porsch, O. 1905. Der Spaltöffnungsapparat im Lichte der Phylogenie. G. Fischer, Jena. 196 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prantl, K. 1881. Untersuchungen zur Morphologie der Gefässkryptogamen. II. Die Schizaeaceen. W. Engelmann, Leipzig.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rao, H. S. 1939. Cuticular studies of Magnoliales. Proc. Indian Acad. Sci. (Biol.)9: 99–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rasmussen, H. 1981. Terminology and classification of stomata and stomatal development—A critical survey. Bot. J. Linn. Soc.83: 199–212.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rauter, J. 1870. Entwicklungsgeschichte der Spaltöffnungen vonAneimia undNipholobus. Mitt. Naturwiss. Vereines Steiermark, Bd. II, HeftII: 188–203.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rohweder, O., R. Schlumpf &K. Krattinger. 1971. Anmerkungen zum diacytischen Spaltöffnungstyp und zur taxonomischen Bedeutung der Spaltöffnungen in allgemeinen. Ber. Deutsch. Bot. Ges.84: 275–285.

    Google Scholar 

  • Solereder, H. 1908. Systematic anatomy of the dicotyledons. Oxford Univ. Press, London. Vol. 2, pages 645–1182.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stace, C. A. 1965. Cuticular studies as an aid to plant taxonomy. Bull. Brit. Mus. (Nat. Hist.), Bot.4: 1–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stevens, R. A. &E. S. Martin. 1978. A new ontogenetic classification of stomatal types. Bot. J. Linn. Soc.77: 53–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strasburger, E. 1866–1867. Ein Beitrag zur Entwicklungsgeschichte der Spaltöffnungen. Jahrb. Wiss. Bot.5: 297–342.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stromberg, A. Ya. 1956. K voprosu o klassifikatsii ustichnykh tipov b listyakh rastenii. Sb. Tr. Tbilissk. N.-I. Khim.-Farm. Inst.8: 51–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Timonin, A. K. 1986. O taksonomicheskom “vese” priznakov ustichnogo apparata i evoliutsii etoi struktury u tsvetkovykh. Bjull. Moskovsk. Obshch. Isp. Prir., Otd. Biol.91(1): 72–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tognini, P. 1897. Contribuzione allo studio delia organogenie comparata degli Storni. Att. Inst. Bot. Univ. Lab. Crittogam. Pavia4: 1–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tomlinson, P. B. 1969. Anatomy of the monocotyledons. II. Commelinales—Zingiberales. Oxford Univ. Press, London. 446 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • — 1974. Development of the stomatal complex as a taxonomic character in the monocotyledons. Taxon23: 109–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Cotthem, W. 1970a. Comparative morphological study of the stomata in the Filicopsida. Bull. Jard. Bot. Nat. Belg.40: 81–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — 1970b. A classification of stomatal types. Bot. J. Linn. Soc.63: 235–246.

    Google Scholar 

  • — 1971. Vergleichende morphologische Studien über Stomata und eine neue Klassifikation ihrer Typen. Ber. Deutsch. Bot. Ges.84: 141–168.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Staveren, M. G. C. &P. Baas. 1973. Epidermal leaf characters of the Malesian Icacinaceae. Acta Bot. Neerl.22: 329–359.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Vliet, G. J. C. M. &P. Baas. 1975. Comparative anatomy of the Crypteroniaceae sensu lato. Blumea22: 175–195.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Weizen, P. C. &P. Baas. 1984. A leaf anatomical contribution to the classification of the Linaceae complex. Blumea29: 453–479.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vesque, J. 1889. De l’emploi des caractères anatomiques dans la classification des végétaux. Bull. Soc. Bot. France36: XLI-LXXVII.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilkinson, H. P. 1979. The plant surface (mainly leaf). Pages 97–165in C. R. Metcalfe & L. Chalk, Anatomy of the dicotyledons, 2nd ed. Vol. 1. Oxford Univ. Press, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • — 1983. Leaf anatomy ofGluta (L.) Ding Hou (Anacardiaceae). Bot. J. Linn. Soc.86: 375–403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Baranova, M.A. Historical development of the present classification of morphological types of stomates. Bot. Rev 53, 53–79 (1987). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02858182

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02858182

Keywords

Navigation